Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05-26-1987 Council Packet
AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR TUESDAY, MAY 26, 1987, 7:00 P.M. (*) Asteris': items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held upon request. Memos regarding each of the A ,,nda items are available in the Public Packet �pthich .piaI�'p f",$�, ained u,)on request from the Recorder. i �,;-i 71�ERN� ROL% CALL MAY 2 n 1:,67 1. CONSENI AGENDI�* C0-Y F DRUM 2. PUBLIC HEARING 7:90 P.M. - 41151 Ann Fisher, 774 Tonkawa Road - Renewal Variance} - Resolution APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 3. Regular Meetinq of May 11, 1987 * 4. Board of Review Meeting May .13, 1987 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REPORT - JoEllen Hurr Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Maureen Bellows Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT * 5. Comprehensive Plan #2 - Highway 12 (Table to June 22, 1987) 6. #990 Ward Ferrell, 3405 Watertown Road - Variances - Continuation of Review Tabled on June 9, 1986 7. #1112 Smit.: Ray Marina & Yacht Club, 1960 Shoreline Drive - Conditional Use Permit 8. #1'42 Smith Bay Marina & Yacht Club - Commercial Site Plan and Variance 9. #1117 Willard C ;hull, 11.25 Spring dill Road - Variance - Resolution 11. #1119 W. Duncan �Millan, 17041 Fox Street - Conditional UsePermit - Variance - Resol.t on 11. 41135 Robert Hanning, Jr., 4220 Sixth Avenue North - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 12. # 1 1 38 Ronald Demshar, 2821 Casco Poi rt Road - Variance - Resolution 13. #1.139 James Lear, 2'525 Dunwoody Avenue - Variance - Resolution 14. #1ld9 Tom Berthiaume, 3035 Casco Point Road - Variance - Resolution 15. #1141 Karlton Gewpler, 1955 Fagerness Point Road - Variance - Rexc-lat ion 16. #1132 Douglas Bumgardner, 3800 west Wayzata Blvd - Conditioral Use Permit - R*solution 16a. 01127 Richard Brown/Richard Erickson, 1245-1295 Sixth Avenue North - Suodivision Of A Lot Line Rearranqement - Final Resolution MAYOR'S REPORT 17. Park Commission Chairperson Appointment 18. Park Commission Appointment CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 19. Charles Henke, 3536 Lyric Avenue - Revocation Temporary Certificate of Occupancy - Resolution 26. Charles Henke, 3536 Lyric Avenup - itazar,ious Buildings Proceedings - Resolution 21. Ingebord Cici, 875 MaN►sata Boulevard - Request for Water Connection 22. City Facilities Space Study (Table to 6122/87) AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR TUESDAY, MAY 26, 19R7, 7:00 ".M. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Cont. 23. Budget Education Meeting 24. Annual Fire Arms Permit - Ordinance 25. Authority to Hirk, Temporary Employment - Police Department *26. 4545 Wayzata Boulevard (Table to 6/22/87) *27. Reject Bids for Utility Tractor *28. Authority to Hire ')atrol Officer *29 Orono/Wayzata Fire Contract Extension *30. Administrator's Information County Load 116 MCWD Meeting 5/28/87 Municipal Liquor Store Sale 39.65 Sixth Avenue Vorth 200 Hollander Road City Manager's Spring Conference MnDOT Highway 12 Meeting C; :Y ATl"ORIiEY' S REPORT LICENSES ( 31 * ) BII.LS (32*) "nJOURNMENT PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE aL_ PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME OR NUMBER NAME (please print) ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) 7-7 ' I 2._,4 I A -lox N3 4�� Z,4jtet • 1�. .411 lit? 6A6Aiot,>d cJul / 4f �IY4 i L s �,1 ��,� ' C r�f`�► Ir a %�S�r�(t t�cvv �n�uc17riU�/� s. 6. .7. ,8. .9 . !0. CITY OF 0110h10 Na C*V C Donor WO hold a puelic nNrrq go Council :1nn10en al 12T6 &x^ free en Tireeday Moo N 1061 M ? 00 p t all the WAMW Of AM nailer a &AM -don to two" vrwwe to oeml a W&,0W ra mitt td Na wv%00 l reeldenco rVa,d V a web w Of Aect+ at the dr%orty based aR T T4 Tdnkm flow A/ permm *Wwt vo to be hood will rs M" 11MM�1 reY - rp re =araarte in Mle CRY d t *G ICI rOVIDW. .otKi.�ertrent ay a a«w w c li C4unal O*V* A htaf lNltt� 1rw a aw" A* W Wit OW IPLOra►Me The char arw pl mm a Mnr is if V Affidavit of Publication L State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin. Bill Holm, being duly sworn, on oath says that he is f an authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as THE LAKEK Mound, Min- nesota, and has full knowledge - ' :he facts which are stated below A.) The newspaper has complied with all the require- ments constituting qualifications as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331 A 02, 331 A.07. and other applicable laws. as amended B) The printedO which is attacd was cut from the columr s of said newspaper. and was printed and published once each week for l successive weeks It was first published Monday. the J e day of 19 b and was thereafter printed and lished every Monday, to and including Mon ay. the day of . 19 v� . r Authorized Agent Subscribed and sworn to me on this / day of 190 By Notary Public Rate Information I owasl t I'lSSrt.eU Tale pa'd by l,�rmnrr:d; user. !nr ; umpata t,ie space S% 84 pet imh is r Mdc!mum rate allowed by few roe above* nialter $4 54:aet inch .)1 Rate attuelly ,_har jd for above matter $4 '>4 per tml) f .1<h :t.S INJOdi rkn".l:easlve Wee$' 53 O j OW 'rich 0110 'It MUTING To: From; Date: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Al Ity 2 g 1987 CITY OF ORO, W Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator May 1.9, 1987 Subject: #1151 Ann fisher, 774 ronkawa Road - Renewal Variance e. Public Hearing - Resolution List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Resolution Exhibit B Staff. memo & Exhibits of 5/13/87 Discussion - This is a request for a renewal of variances to side setback and average lakeshore setback originally approved in 1985. The only change is that applicant at this tim= is only constructing the portion of project requiring the side setback variance. The attached proposed resolution is written so that the entire previous approval is renewed. Any portion of the approved project not covered by building permits as of 5/26/88 is subject to a further variance renewal application after that date. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval per the attached resolution. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) AND SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 FILE 41151 WHEREAS, Ann C. Fisher (rareinafter "the applicant") is the owner if the property located at 774 '.onkawa Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: All. that part of Lot 14, PARTEN':, POINT FIRST DIVISION, according to the recorder? plat thereof, lying Southeasterly of a line drawn from a point on the Southwesterly line of said Lot 14, distant 51.34 feet Northwesterly of the Southwesterly corner of said Lot 14 to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, said line being parallel to the Northwesterly and Southwesterly lines of said Lot 1.4 (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a renewal variance to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) and 10.22, Subdivision 1 to permit the construction of a deck and screen porch located 7.5' from the side property line where a 10' setback is normally required and encroaching 15 feet into the average lakeshore setback area where no encroachment is normally allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 41151. 2. The property is located in the LR-1B Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this project originally as Application 0940 or. July 15, 1985, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A) The hardships to the property are locations of the neighboring residences, and the angle of the lakeshore in relation to the lot. B) The neighbors' lakeshore views will not be affected due to topography and existing natural screening. C) The increase in hardcover is within the limits prescribed in the zoning code. Paqe 1 of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL K93 D) The proposed addition 11 retain a 95' setback from the lake. E) The side setback encroachment of the new addition is less severe than the encroachment of the existing house, and continues the line of the existing house. 4. The City Counci 1 on July 22, 1965 adopted Resolution 41812 approving the requested variances. 5. The applicant applied for a renewal variance on May 7, 1987. The Planning Commision reviewed this applicatic.. (#1151) on May 19, 1987 and unanimously recommended approval, noting that the portion of the work requiring an average la.keshore setback is not proposed to be constructed at this time. 6. The City Counci' has considered this application including the findings and recoti,inendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 7. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to otner property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necese_,ry to alleviate a demon- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property ii.ght of the applicant; anI would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grantb variances per Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) and 10.22, Subdivision 1 to permit the construction of a deck and screen porch located 7.5' f rom the side property line where a 10' setback is normally required, and encroaching 15' into the overage lakeshore setback area where no encroachment is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant is placed on notice that the proposal increases the hardcover in the 75-250' setback zone to 2,100 square feet or 231 where the maximum allowable hardcover is 25% or 2,250 square feet, and that any future proposals which would result in hardcover exceedinq the allowable limits would be subject to a variance procedure and may not be approved. Paqe 2 of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one Year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (May 26, 1988). Any portion of the project not covered under a building ,permit as of that date sha?1 require a further variance renewal application. 3. 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. 4. The undersigned applicants nave read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 26th day of May, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Gr.abek, Mayor roperty Owner(s To: Planning Commission Chairman Keill.ey Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: May 13, 1987 Subject: #1151 Ann Fisher, 774 Tonkawa Road - Renewal. Variance - Information Item (Public Hearing to be held at Council Meeting of May 26, 1987 per Jeanne A. Mabusth's memo of May 8, 1987, Council. approval of May 11, 19C7) List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Jeanne A. Mabusth's Memo of 5/8/87 Exhibit C - Buildinq Plans Exhibit D - Council Minutes of 7/22/85 Exhibit E - Planning Commission Minutes of 7/15/85 Exhibit F - Memo & Exhibits of 7/16/85 Exhibit G - Resolution 0181.2 Discus lion - This is a renewal variance for side setback encroachment of 2.5' to construct a room addition. The original approval also included an average setback variance for a screen porch, but that work is not proposed at this time. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval of the renewal variance for Ann Fisher at 774 Tonkawa Road per the findings and conditions of Resolution No. 1812 approved by Council. on July 22, 1985. -41- 1/st 1l, 1 r CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION uc► L L r<� c: a S - % - � Fee 75. u0 _ Receipt _�QAp. ROL Initials — Initial Apnlication Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPEaTY LOCATION X Site Address 77 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Please check one - Is the property _x 606 y abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ---------------------------------------•------------------------------------ APPLICANT /.� / Phone ( home) '/%/- D 2- 7/ / l Name S/``�� Phone (work) ZZ7 Address: ! 7'['�CG -y4 City:��n0 zip. x OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)_ Name4/1,v Phone (work) Address: _ _ _ _ City:G Zip: Date Property Acquired (f 0(month/year) I(do)do no)alsoowntheac.acentparcelsofland` ----- - ------ -- -- ---------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential _ __ ,� Other k sr,-peci ty ) ----------------------------------------------------------- ---- -- A DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated or.s ruction st $ l% © - dEf'�4C�1°�,tl^t�nC�i�r�r�K odc"rl<<'' , Describe request in detal: �- /pSS Se06e42 N E'n Cj'04?4rl-oZ- f� ------------------------ --_---------------- -------_----------- - - - - --- - - - - - - - - VARIANCES REQUIRED 1,ot 1%re,a Lot ;-;i dt h �% Hardcover Setback Vi r itinr+ _ _ Frc,nt _._l1.__ `'ide _ Rear? Other HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical di ficulty resulting, rum strict. enforcement of zoning regulations: /S Q?2 ,SQ'' !._ DOS • 4/ /I:AZS �v --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAI, PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property c-ond'tions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: Q�4O1/ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners withii " (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Fina, A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Stamped, lecal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above li.st wit.. no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Pla, Mdp. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is comnlete. Zoning Official's Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant. hereby agrees to pro,.ide all information required or requested by the Toning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incarred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true an correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Siynat.ure - Date 5 7 0 7 ("ERS SIGNATURE T`,e owner her(ty a._kowl.edges and agrees to this application and further authorizt.s reasereble entry onto the property I%y City staff, rc:nsultants, agents, Commicr-ion members, and Coun:-11 membe-rs t(Jr purposes of investiga- tion and v( ri'. i 1on off._. this rt qu4jVt. Ownt: r s E;i an..t t.+r !'d(GCJ )at e J Applicant. must ha,.•e nl1 4 +71lttolS ir:tO th<> City c,ffices 2r days before the Planning Commission mutt l q. F1.;rr,inq C!,rrr,0.sion ''`•<"f'` rfne are held on the thirO Mon -'.ay cf' each r-nth. Applicant!. rru!,t. L.v ( rrf-tnt ;at. -11 schoduled review roe?e•tings (-f t.t.f� inn (`car^is icr, rr,'. Cc:unci l and, if an applirdrit is unrat.je to .ott'rd ., 1*0;4' 1?.!ic d rr,'i tin !, t- please r il-e arrAnge- Mf`nt8 t.th haVV An luthot! 7"d ,100rt' it, vT,, `t ! n ycu'r 1.1,ti'e %.ir(l t(' ,a,1vise the Bill ldinq 6 :or+inq off it— r-f tFi1r; r•1:i�r;:t f r-i!'r tr) the r.., "t.inq. TO: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator DATE: May 8, 1987 StIBJ: #1151 Ann Fisher, 774 Tonkawa Road - Renewal Variance - Request to waive formal review by the Planning Commission Section 10.08 Subdivision 2(A) - "The Council by unanimous action may waive reference to the Board of Appeals and Adjustments". Mrs. Fisher was granted a variance to a side setback and the a-•erage lakeshore setback line on the 2.2nd of July 1.985. The original. application involved an addition to the lakeshore of the hcuse of 8 feet with a deck and screened porch attachment (see Exhibit A). The applicant has amended her building pans so that the current proposal only involves the 8 feet principal structure addition and grade level deck (Exhibit. B). She did not realize that variances would still be required and engaged a builder to start construction on June 1st. The fact that this application is a renewal variance in addition to reducing the scope of the improvement plan, the resident asks your consideration by waiving the required public hearing rejuirement. before the Planning Commission. Staff would recommend scheduling the application as an information item at. the Planning Commission meeting of May 18th providing the customary review packet for a recommendation from the Planning Commission. The required public hearing for the renewal variance would be scheduled before the Council at their tr,eeting of May 26, 1987. Tf Counci 1 deems it inappropriate to alter the established procedure, the applicant wil i be advised that a public hearing will be scheduled before the PlFnninq_ Commission at their June 15, 1987 meeting. PROPOSED MOTION Moved by _, serconded Yy , to approve the request of Ann FLs,hfr to waive reference to the Planning Commistiic�n per 5�-,ct ion 1.0.08 Subdivision 3(A) for the formal review of her amended renewa 1 var ianc•e apr l i cat ion and to direct staff to schedule a put�l is hc;•ar inq hefoie the Counci 1 on May 26, 1987 at 7:G0 P.M. Ayes hays f + O t 1 L � � C�Ty OF OR ONO � E EW BUILD RMI 1N3P&Cto DATE tor7-- RMiT NO. APPROVED AS SUSMMI) n APPROVED WITH CORRECTIONS AS NOTED 11rr--'�ff NOT .�Pi�` M - CORRECT & RESUEMUT u--. .nri�er^ are for your lntdtmation. All wort si►itl t done LATE ESHORE s R E G U L A ORONO OROINAN EXCAVATION, FILL! OREGGiNG, TREE I CONSTRUCTION t WITHIN 75 FT OF A WITHIN 26 FT OF A PERMITS ARE RE DOCKS, SEAWA! rEGgL /.�Fsc•Qi.�rio, v ALL Th�AT P.aRT OF L r7T/4 Oq,QTE/VS OO//YT Fi /�CCD/PO/iYG T'G Tf/ERc<<OiQOEO oL.a -' T/lE,��rp� L y OF A L/Nf' ORAWN �.?O/Tl .Q OpiniT ON T.vE' SOC/Ti4 BE//✓lo i-�aRi4LL EL To T,c/E" NO,,,er,-v WESTE-4.::y R.v.O S© o ' I ht-ret-. cc,?.fv that Th,s -s a t,j- and coi,ect %wo:, F,le No the bcunjar -es of the above dewobed land and of the tocation ca ji N, dw9s. x 000.0 De'c�!n P% i-7^.g e t., i oaO.0 J .S will '*LL)ViL'-At L-E." r-.:_ . i � Rt,Xbf_' I FIRE STOP ALL SOFFITS- 1 , j FIRE STOP, STUD SPACES r OVER 10' & AT CEILING LINE. t.JVrNG ROOM r • r. • � �--- � P3sR.•1c YNtNfX?+' D: '!1t4G Aj+@A, t r ♦ �pl i� 1 9ip �� t f ~ ORCHES err' l (� a '► t MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNC I L MEETING HELD JULY 22, 1985. PAGE 5 #934 ROBERT TSCHIVA* 1300 FOX STREET VARIANCE RESOLUTION It was moved by Mayor Butler, seconded by Councilmember Frahm, to approve Resolution #1810 granting a variance to Robert Tschida, 1300 Fox Street, to permit the construction of an enclosed entryway located 28.7 feet from the property line within the 50' sc,tback. Motion, Ayes (5), Nays (0). #937 WHARTON SINKLER 2195 FRENCH LAKE ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #1811 Mr. Wharton Sinkler was present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the applicant's request for a variance to construct a barn for two goats. Zoning Administrator Mabusth requested the resolution be amended requesting a variance of 88' placing the barn 62' to the edge of night -of -way within the required 150' setback (instead of the 22' variance). Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that all the adjacent property owners have been notified and the developer sent a letter of approval It was moved by Councilmember Adams, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to approve Resolution #1811 as amended. Motion, Ayes (5), Nays (0� C�ANN FISHER 774 TONKAWA ROAD VARIANCE RESOLU 10N # 181 2 Ms. Ann Fisher was present for this matter. The applicant requests a variance to permit construction of a deck and screen porch 7.5' from the side property line within the required 10' setback and encroaching 15' into the average lakeshore retbackwhere no encroachment is normally allowed. Asst. Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that hardcover would be increased to 231. It was moved by Councilmember Hammerel, seconded by Mayor Butler, to approve Resolution #1812 granting the variances. Motion, Ayes (5), Nays (0). #942 ARTHUR FINKELSTEIN 1740 SHADYWOOD ROAD VARIANCF. RESOLUTION 11813 Dorothy & Art Finkelstein were present for this matter. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 15, 1985. PAGE 15 #938 ROBERT NASH Motion, Ayes (4), '.ways (0). #940�j ANN C. FISHER TONRAWA ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 10:04 - 10:15 PM Ann C. Fisher was present. Assistant ',;oning Administrator Gaffron noted the certificate of mailing and affidavit of publication. 'There was no one present from the public for this application. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicant is requesting a variance to the average lakeshore setback in order to construct a deck and screen porch on the lakeside of the existing house. There is a steep bank from approximately the 75' line to the shoreline. There is some screening between houses to the south, and a small amount between subject property and the house to the north. The request is to exceed the average house setback by api,-oximately 15' with the deck and screen porch. No neighbors have commented on the project. There is no hardcover problem on this property. Fisher stated that Gabriel Jabbour (neighbor) had talked to Zoning Administrator Mabusth and said everything looked fine. Lajoys also had no problems with the proposal. The hardships include the fact the lot is so narrow and the hill is very steep. Assistant 'Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that. the existing houses on either side are set back more that 75'. Goetten moved, Taylor seconded to recommend approval of the average lakeshore setback and side yard setback variances for Ann C. Fisher finding that: 1. The hardships to the property are locations of the neighboring residences, and the angle of the lakeshore in relation to the lot. 2. The neighbors lakeshore views will not be affected due to topography and existing natural screening. 3. The increase 2n hardcover is within the limits prescribed in the zoning code. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUL•Y 15, 1985. PAGE 16 #940 ANN FJS`iER 4. The roposed addition will retain a 95' setback from the lake. 5. The side setback encroachment of the new addi- tion is less severe than the encroachment of the existing house. And subject to the following condition: 1. The applicant is put on notice that the present hardcover is 23% and any future plans may have limitations put on them within the 0-75' zone. Assistant. Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that in most cases where the building extention actually creeps farther away from the lot line, staff handled the application and if all other points were in order the building was permitted without a variance. Technically speaking, there may be some merit to bringing an application such as that. in for a variance, an issue the Council will have to address. At this point, when you are 8' instead of 10' from the side lot line, should there be a side setback variance requested? In the past the policy has been to allow such an extention on an existing house even if the extention en- croaches the setbacks. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that it improves a substanda-d setback. Fisher need that an addition to the house is also being planned. The plans have been turned into the building offical. Could the footings be allowed to go in for the deck before the application goes to Council, for economical reasons? Assistant "Ooninq Administrator Gaffron stated that this application could go the July 22nd Council meeting which would speed up the process. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (0). #94.1 PAUL R. NUTT 2739 SHADYWOOD ROAD VARIANCE: AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 10:15 - 10:30 PM Paul R. Nutt was not present. Zoninq Administrator Mabusth noted the certificate of mailing and affidavit of publication. The following from the public were present: To: Orono Council Members From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator. Date: July 16, 1985 Subject: #940 Ann C. Fisher, 774 Tonkawa Road - Variance Zoning District - LR-1B Application - Average lakeshore setback for deck and screen porch addition. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Pro*)erty Owners List Exhibit D - Survey With Staff Notations Exhibit E - Hardc(-,,Pr Calculations The applicant requests a variance to the average lakeshore setback in order to construct a deck and screen porch on the lakeside of the existing house. This addition will encroach approximately 15' into the average setback but will still be about 95' from the lakeshore. The addition will increase the 75-250' hardcover from 16% to 23%, within the allowable limits. The steep hill to the south, the natural screening of trees and shrubbery and the angled lakeshore would make it appear that the addition will not affect the lake view of the neighbors. Note that the addition will conform to the extended south line of the house, so that the existing side setback of about 7.5 feet at the easterly corner of the existing house will increase to 10' at the edge of the screen porch. It is an issue whether a variance is required for this sit 'tion; while technically a side setback variance is required for the coast uction less than 10' from the side lot line, the ge,ceral City policy in the past has been to allow, without a variance, such extentions of a building line if there is no greater encroachment. Neither neighbor has presented an objection to the proposal. Planning Commission recommended approval of the average lakeshore setback and side yard setback variances, finding that: 1. The hards'.iips to the property are locations of the neigh5oring residences, a:id the angle of the lakeshore in relation to the lot. The neighbors lakeshore views will not be affected due to topo- graphy snd existing natural screening. 3. The increase in hardcover is within the limits prescribed in the zoning code. 4. The proposed a(! -I i t i on will retain a 95' setback from the lake. 5. The side setback encroachment of the new addition is less severe than the encroachment of the existing house, and continues the line of the existing house. Zoning File #940 July 16, 1985 Page 2. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Applicant is placed on notice that. the 75-250' hardcover percentage will become 23% with these improvements, leaving little room for additional hardcover on the property. Staff wou).d recommend approval per the attached resolution. r •V�Y/ � CITY OF ORONO - #cZA)PL44) Jr �yyjj vim,, Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional pro)ecy) After -the -Fact Fees ------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 77V Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Please check one -- Is the property abstract, or torrens? Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ------•-----•----------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Nam;/7// - . ' ` Cc Name. ePhone Mailing Address / c',; /r<«C.: OWNER Name < Phone �Y Mailing Address Date Property Acquired -�� (month/year) I (do) (do not).,,also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property 1�.�•�^#llel? ''f` Pesidential other (specify) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in/ detail:IS • . :. CIO,,C-! U -------------------------------------------------------------------------- V1IRIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover f Qk� _ �r ..'t i in ✓1/!: i.•if.� li- �•✓ y^ e'+'*_��� Setback Variances ( Front Side Rear) ' Ot he r (OVER) CITY OF ORONO - #cZA)PL44) Jr �yyS-O�jj vim,, Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional pro)"CV) After -the -Fact Fees ------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address; %Ti Property Identification Number (P.I .D.) Please check one -- Is the property abstract, or torrens? Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ------•-----•---------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Name /1// Phone e/7/ -Oa7/ e iu Mailing Address %C�c%�.c'a OWNER Name - / / / . 1 2_ Phone Mailing Address Date Property Acquired �i.'-2'. _ (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ��_ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property 1�.�•�^#llel? ,' f,,... Pesidential other (specify) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in/ detail:IS • . :. CIO,,C-! U -------------------------------------------------------------------------- V1IRIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover f Qk�-ter ..'ti irt� ✓1/!: i.•if.�- li- �•✓y^e'+'*_��� Setback Variances ( Front Side Rear) ' Ot he r (OVER) `.t HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations i...'''"- fj=•-���'� .:r:r .�' �= ,•..,.. rf. h'r •. ,r f•- rr C"'1`F Li /lr t.. i.. ... !f. f :' % .` .ter: r�� r, / I l' ,G Jt C`'' l rC%•'C!°_L,r"'CC .!G'i^:'r (,.`r �. •r' i i`!` ,i�, P i"r.iC .. ii a DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements:':_ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Propeity Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain this list. from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271 ) 3. Stamper?, legal sized envelopes (# 10) pie -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat Map. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. --------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- '1PPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information ..equired or requested by the 'Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or 1—lusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certi f.ies that the i ricirriati.on supplied is true and correct to the hest, of his/her knowlpdge. Applicant's signature Date OWNERS SIGNATURE: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes cf investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date Applicant mutt have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planninq Commiss »n Meetinq. Planning Commi ss i on Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. d / rp 1�7�/%" �:�• P � • ° • / �Sf /� rji o 18) 410 hI v oe> 17) r /�,• _�i 9'K 1G0 C j +. ,bC c9 mob iI E 1 q�, •,s n N0 PAR T W 5 a � 4 � , � er f'1q {% � s ♦I " vo � _!l/ .`� c riff*•--.. , w �' a���. ^ � :.'t �' w Ak vw :. JT � C�� C ,�.aa� • sIP M� • ,Ok If P A R T 09 ' a w uj y � LU'• ��G� a ' a,� e • � e o $ � ib b'" � ill a 7 , 0 4' fiCr` � LN i Rt11 DATE K/I1/45 NElOEM COIRITY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PRDPLRTY OWNEPS LIST 6ATCH "I 36 05-117-23 33 0003 3^ 05-117-23 34 OOV, w MOP A OR 007SS TOtOtAMA Rf-i 00750 TONKAWA RD GWIJR I1ANE M J KOTTEIA'IN A J # kGTTEMANN HENRY E EE'15011 ETAL TAXPAitR WILLIAM KOTTEMAHI !!ENRY E BEN500 NAt1E/ADOR 75S TONFAIIA 00 750 T:3t0'AWA PC LONG LAKE MN 5S3'-6 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 BS-117-23 34 0008 PRBP AOBR H779 TOWA14A RD OWNEa NAME NARTLET M LAJOY ETAL TA>PAYER HARTLEY M LAJBY r NAME/ADOR VT 81 OX 468 LONG LAKE MN SS356 r� 38 OS-117-,,-3 34 0012 PROP AOOR ma4fit NAME 70BEPT A STEIN TAXPAYER ROBERT A OR ELtTN STEIN NAME/ADOR 279S SHADIWOOp RD EXCELSIOR MN SS331 n UP AOOR 00.0w NAr.E TAXPAYER TOTAL BATCH 001 00009 NAME 'ADOQ 33 05-117-23 34 0009 C0 7 74 TCtWAWA RD KENNETH R HRRR L l-IFE ANN C FISHER 774 I0W. -I WA P 0 A 0 Or ONO t1N 55556 33 05-117-23 34 0013 PHYLLIS P HOCH RUOY HOC" 215 ` :RR Y AVE S i11 19 WAYZAIA MN 55391 REPORT 140. PI435401 PAGE I 38 05-117-23 34 0007 00760 TOW)'4A RD A 8 0 BEkTELSON AkrHUR J & BETTY M SERTELSON 12t 17 BUPWE:L OR 11IKNETOtii r NN 55343 36 05-117-23 34 0010 00730 TO!'&:AWA RD G a 0 JA860i1R GABRIEL E jABBO'JR 71O TOW AWA RD LEE tC LAKE MN 55356 36 08-117-23 21 M l 00301 TONKAWA RD JCHt: h 8 SUSAN M MC:RRISON JLllltl M MCRRISf:tl 601 'TflV.1WA RO l.M.', LAVE MN 55356 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTLO ARE AN ACCUPATE AND TRUE REPPESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS O� THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DENARTtZir OF PROPERTY TAXAT 'ltTOYE BEST OF MY MCMLEDGE ANU BELIEF, DAT�If�//O L ORONO HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET :.AKESHORE A. Existing B. Existing Existing C. hardcover D. Proposed E: Proposed hardcover F. Allowed SETBACK lot area hardcover hardcover hardcover ZONE in zone in zone percentage [ (B:A) x 1001 in zone percentage [ (D.A) x 1001 percentage 0-75, '� '1sf — sf % sf "/p 0 /o 75-250' �'� sf sf ..1 r�r'` sf J % 25 250-500' sf sf -� �• `~O �sf _' . 30 500-1000, sf sf "�� sf % 35 Directions: A. Existing Lot Area in Zone - includes the total square footage of dry buildable land within the specified zone. B. Existing Hardcover in Zone - includes the square footage of existing roofs, decks, sidewalks, driveways (gravel or paved) and other rain -impervious surfaces within the specified zone. C. Existing Hardcover Percentage - divide the number in B by the number in A_ and multiply by 100. D. Proposed Hardcover in Zone - includes the existing hardcover plus all proposed additional hardcover. E. Proposed Hardcover Percentages - divide the number in D by the numb. A and multiply by 100. F. Allowed Hardcover Percentages - if the percentages in column E for a._ etback zone exceed the allowed percentages in column F, you should contact the Zoning Department at 473-7357 to discuss the possibilities of obtaining a variance. Generally, if a concurrent removal of existing hardcover matches the additional hardcover proposed, re6ulting in no net increase of hardcover in a specified zone, a variance may not be necessary. br Sauk, (' - 't "C► � C- -' ' ' :S' ��' �� � �� � S ; t , - � U � S. •+ (o L.�� � = 7. � g � ..�r. ? I c'� c� it i -� r ' / _ ( r G 0030514 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL SEP 10 1935 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO INN. MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE D+NE►'1N(XMJN`l SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) AND SECTION 10.22 BDIVISION 1 �_�!� ✓� FILE #94 WHEREAS, Ann C. Fisher (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 774 Tonkawa Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: All that part of Lot 14, PARTEN'S POINT FIRST DIVISION, according to the recorded pla= thereof, lying Southeasterly of a line drawn from a point on the Southwesterly line of said Lot 14, distant 51.34 feet Northwesterly of the South- westerly corner of said Lot 14 to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, said line being parallel to the Northwesterly and Southwesterly lines of said Lot 14 (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal 'Zoning Code Sections 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) and 10.22, Subdivision 1 to permit the construction of a deck and screen porch located 7.5 feet from the side property line where a 10' setback is normally required and e--croaching 15 feet into the average lakeshore setback area where no encroachment is norma 11 y a 11 owed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minne-ota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #940. 2. The property is located in the LR-1B Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on July 15, 1985, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A) The ha-dships to the property are locations of the neighboring residences, and the angle of the lakeshore in relation to the lot. Pagv 1 of 4 City ®f ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1.ri, B) The neighbors lakeshore views will not be affected due to topography and existing natural screening. C) The increase in hardcover is within the limits prescribed in the zoning code. D) The proposed addition will retain a 95' setback from the lake. E) The side setback encroachment of the new addition is less severe than the encroachment of the existing house, and continues the line of the existing house. 1. The City Council has considered this application .including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the %ariance would not adversely affect. traffic conditions, Iight, air nor pose a fire hazard or other ganger to rei.ghborina property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a de:.,onstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to pre- serve a sub,,tantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Cade and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER ANn CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Counci 1 hereby grants a variance to the Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) and 10.22, Subdivision 1 to permit the construction of a deck and screen porch located 7.5 feet from the side property line where a 10' setback is normally required, and encroaching 15 feet into the average lakeshore setback area where no encroachment is normally allowed, subjecL to the fol lowing conditions: 1. Applicant is placed on notice that the current proposal increases the hardcover in the 75-250' setback zone to 2100 square feet or 23% where the maximum allowable hardcover is 25% or 2250 square feet, and that any future proposals which would result in hardcover exceeding the allowable limits would be subject to a variance procedure and may not oe approved. Page 2 o: 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1 .' 2. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (July 22, 1986). 3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any author.ty granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and here- by agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 22nd day of July, 1985. (1) Property owner. r Mary C. Butler, Mayor i City of oR®No RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1812 STATE OF MINNESOI'A ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this G�� day of �u�_y , 1985 before me a Not,,��ry Public_ within and for said county, personally appeared f;iU,ti �,, {��.�i�, known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that lie (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. IP M n� COvt. `"`'`'• NOT pIP1 �� HENNE Expues �� mm�sston STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) NOT RY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES On this day of. _ , 1985, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that. he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY F'lJF3I,IC Pa, jo1 4 cif 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) CITY OF ORONO ) I Dorothy M. Hall in, City Clerk of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereb certify that I have compared the foregoing copy of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Orono with the original record of such resolution in the Mirjute3 of the proceedings of said City Council at a meeting of said City Council held on July 22 __9 1985 and that the same is a true and correct copy of said resolution was duly adopted by said City Council at said meeting. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this _ 9th_ day of -----_Jul} -------- _ 19 85 X othy M, allin, ity Clerk (SEAL) This document is being recorded for the benefit of the City of Orono per Minnesota Statutes 386.77. State Deed Tax Due Hereon: Exempt. This instrument was drafted by: City of Orono P.O. box 66 Crystal Bay, MN ,� r' MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY'1'1,,11 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. '4. eO � The Orono Council met on the above datetTthe following members present: Mayor Grabek, Councilmembers Callahan, Sime, Peterson, and Goetten. The followinc represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Public Works Coordinator. Gerhardson, Building & 'Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning & Zonino Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Peterson. City Attorney Barrett and City Engineer Cook were also present. CONSENT AGENDA* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the Consent Agenda subject. to: Removal of - Item #31-Off Sale Liquor License requested by City Administrator. Bernhnrdson Item #21-#1151 Ann Fisher requested by Callahan Item #40-Administrator's Information requested by Callahan Additi -i of - It ;n #25-4545 Wayzata Blvd. Access requested by Ca�lahan Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the Minutes of the April. 27, 1987 Council meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARR COMMISSION COMMENTS RESIGNATION OF CHAIRPERSON - TERRY MORSE It was moved by Mayer Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept with regret the resignation of Mr. Terry Morse as Park Commission Chair and member effective May 4, 1987, and for the Park Commission to determine and recommend to Council at, a later date as to a new Chai rpprsrn for the Paris Commission. Motion, Ayes 5, gays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Planning Commission representative Paul Taylor had no comments at this time. PUBLIC COMMENTS i't;crrf^ wee e nc; :,ornment s f i cam t, he. pul.1 1, at t h , F, timtr. I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL ►"RETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: COMPREHENSIVE P-,AN #2- HIGHWAY .12* TABLED TO MAY 2;, 1987 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to postpone all action and consideration of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment invol'•ing the Highway 12 Corridor until the Council meeting of Tuesday, May 26, 1997. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1075 JOSEPH DURDA 3135 NORTH SHORE DRIVE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Present for this matter were applicant's son Dan Durda, Attorney Ray Piirainen, and landscape contractor John Perkins. City Administrator Ec:rnhardson explained the request for reconsideration of & variance request that granted a 0- 75' setback variance to construct a balcony and an after -the -fact variance to construct a deck in the 0-75' zone fo.r a property located on a lagoon off Lake Minnetonka on North Shore Drive. Originally, the house was constructed prior to the adoption of the 75' lakeshore setback requirement, subsequently a deck addition was constructed in 1982 which was about 30' from the lagoon, the Building & Zoning Dept. at that time incorrectly considered the lagoon to be a wetland. Last year, applicant built another connecting deck without a permit, and the 75' setback was invoked deeming the lagoon as part of the lake. Planning Commission recommender: after -the -fact approval of the deck subject to removal of an equivalent amount (72 s.f.) of plastic sheeting in the 0-75' zone for no net increase in hardcover. Council ultimately approved the variances with a 2-1 vote subject to removal of all plastic sheeting under rock beds on the property (approximately 2,200 s.f.) and denied the ability to replace it with geotechnical fabric. (It was noted that the one councilmember who voted against this approval was opposed to approving any ad6itional hardcover on this property.) Applicant is requesting to not have to remove all the plastic on the property because there are sor treas where it acts as a protective barrier to keep wa,-. away from the house; and be allowed to use a geotechnical fabric under the other rock beds to prevent the use of chemicals to control the weeds which may be consideree a pollutant to the lake. In staff's opinion, there are areas where the plastic could be removed with no effect on the house, amounting to about 1,660 s.f. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 #1075 DURDA CONTINUED Mr. Piirainen explained the history of the screen porch and patio addition some of which was done previously to the ownership of the Durda's in 1985. Applicant is requesting reconsideration and adoption of the Planning Commission recommendation of removing 72 s.f. c-` plastic sheeting in the 0-75. He noted that the hou. is 400' back from the main lake and the problem occurs now that the pond is considered lake. Applicant feels that even the staff recommendation of 1,660 s.f. removal is unnecessary to solve the problem. Councilmember Goetten stated she was a member of the Planning Commission that approved this application, she questioned why Council would not allow use of geotechnical fabric. Councilmember Callahan stated that his concern with the use of geotechnical fabric is that the City does not, yet have specific standards for use of this fabric as an alternative. Dan Durda explained that there is a storm run-off structure that is on the adjoining property which already direct the majority of run-off into the pond. He implored the Council. to allow this variance for his parents taking into consideration their hard earned work upgrading the channel and pond area. John Perkins reviewed the drainage areas of concern and the efforts that were tak-n with the use of plastic liner to resolve the water problem. Councilmember Goetten felt this was a unique property, however agreed that the back portion is overbuilt. She asked if applicant would be content with the: staff recommendation in an effort to help cut down of the hardcover. Mr. Piirainen stated that they felt that Planning Commission recommendation ,s reasonable and fair, whereas the staff recommendation and Council recommendation is too extreme. Councilmember Goetten moved to recommend approval _he staff recommendation of removal of 1,660 s.f. of p—stic and replaced with geotechnical fabric. No second was made to this motion. Motion fails. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL. MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 #IC75 DURDA CONTINUED I-V'-- was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Mayor Gr.abek, to deny the application and that the previous action by Council be sustained. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 2. Councilmember Goetten and Sime voted nay. Councilmember Sime stated that when the home was built, the City had a different view of what consituted a lake and the house was put in legally conforming with City guidelines at that time, however, since that time, the City has changed its opinion finding that the pond was considereC, lake in addition to its hardcover regulations. He is in favor of the Planning Commission recommendation. Councilmember Goetten stated since she was part of the original Planning Commission recommendation, she still feels it is the most reasonable fair recommendation. Mr. Piirainen asked what their next avenue of recourse would be? Mayor Grabek referred mr. Piirainen's question to City Attorney Barrett and asked Mr. Barrett what the City's action would be if applicant did not comply with the variance conditions previously imposed by Council. City Attorney Barrett stated that applicant can either ac� ept the variance on the terms granted, or the City has the right to require applicant to de -construct the deck. Attorney Piirainen stated that they are only willing to tyke out 72 s.f. of the deck. indicating they are not willing to comply with the terms of the granting of the variance for 'he deck. #1103 HOWARD EISINGE,R 3245 WAYZATA BOULEVARD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Howard Ei: inge_ ,nd John -ion of Park Construction were present for ;:his matter. City Administrator Bernhardson ek, 'ained the request for a conditional use permit to fill t.e 12 acre former dump site with approximately 150,000 - 00,000 cu.ic yards of fill obtained from the I-394 upgradinq. Based on 200,000 cubic yards of fill, it would level the area by addinq approximately 10'. Various agencies have been contacted and all have commented on the impact on the wetlands, etc. One issue raised by the City Engineer is what effect this fill would have on the landfill, which is surrounded by wetlands - what would happ.vn to the organic materials and other debris in the landfill - would it migrate out into the wetlands r..usinq MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 #1103 EISINGER CONTINUED contamination? Since this issue has been raised, a letter was sent to the 5 agencies that had previously reviewed the application seeking their opinion on this concern. One agency recommended that the applicant submit the original soils analysis of 1974 to a soils engineer for his analysis of the impact of the fill loading on the existing dump site and potential of contam.ineted materials migrating out into adjacent wetlands. Staff recommends tabling until this .information is submitted by applicant. Mr. Eisinger stated that they plan to put as much f i 1 1 necessary (up to 200,00 cubic yards) to obtain a 990-992 elevation. Mayor Grabek felt the Council should give applicant some direr{ -ion as to what they would recommend prior to his investing in the soils analysis. Planning Commission member Johnson noted that Planning Commission recommended appro,i' of 100,000 cubic yards of fill and the City to montio- during the next year for consideration of more fill. City Administrator Be-nhardsca noted that possioly the only acceptable or th=_s land after it is filled would be a driving 2 noting that anricul.tural use would not be acceptable nor for r dential home development. City Engineer Co, commented that the site as it currently exist. resents potential for increased leach .te, pot holes, and retention ponds and felt that it would be beneficial to put some fill to smooth out levations. Mayor Grabek stated he would be in favor of allowing some f i 1 1 based on the City Engineer's r.ecommen6aiton, but applicant should submit supportive documentation for allowing more fill than necessary. Councilmember Goetten stated she would like more detailed information from P. A. "tv Engineer Cooy recommer.L •d that an analysis be none by a roils lab on -he effe,t of such a project. Council unanimously agre• that they would react positiv-sly to al lowing some f ill if the soils lab report came back favorably. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 11103 EISINGER CONTINUED It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to table this rratter until sufficient supportive information has been submitted to staff (to the least amount expense to the applicant-). Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #11.09 CURTIS L. JOHNSON 2024 SHADYWOOD ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2168 Curtis Johnson and Pam Wi 1 lette were present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for lot area/lot width, hardcover, side setback, L rerage lakeshore setback variances to put a new foundation under house, centering it on the lot, and add a second story with second story deck. He expla- -d the Planning Commission recommendation on 4/20/87 - :,pproval and, per applicant's request, rlanni.ng Commission's revised uecommendation of approval regarding the location of the house and deck in relation to the averacre lakeshore setback on 5/4/87. The revised recommendation stated that the house must be behind the average house setback line; and second story deck may extend 6' further lakeward or up to the "average second story deck setback line", whichever is more restrictive. This recommendation was made taking into consideration the locations of the adjacent properties' decks. Councilmember Callahan suggested that Council address f-ture standards of measuring_ average deck/rouse se L-backs . It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2168 grant;-ig the variances per staff and Planning Commission recommendation. Motion, Ayes 5, nays 0. #111.7 WILLARD C. SHULL 1125 SPRING HILL ROAD VARIANCE DENIAL RESOLUTION Mrs. Shull was present: and had no comments. Per request by applicant's attorney, it was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to table this matter at this time. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. MINUTES 0? THE .W:GULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD .AAV 11, 1987 #1119 W. DUNCAN MACMILLAN 1700 FOX STREET CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Present for this matter were: James McNulty of McNulty Construction; Consultant Planner Edward Hasek of Dahlgren, Shardlow, Uban; Attorney Todd D. Andrews; Duncan MacMillan; and other members of the MacMillan family. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a variance and conditional use permit to construct a caretaker house and a 16,000 s.f. (in floor. area) recreational facility, most of which consists of and indoor tennis court. He noted that the attorney for. the MacMillan's has submitted a list of their hardships. One question is whether the construction of this facility may or may not be olit of line with this particular sizeable property. Secondly; it may not reach the level of hardships, however unique, to justify the variances. Because of these questions, staff recommends possibly looking at an ordinance to regulate accessory structures over 1.000 s.f. by the use of a conditional use permit. Mr. McNulty explained the proposed landscaping in order to minimize the effect that the difficulty in location of the the recreational faci 1 its due to the sci 1 s and slopes. Mr.. Hasek further explained the careful planning involved in the final. proposed location of the fa.cili.ty and their plans for two levels of 12'-16' pine trees to accomplish year around natural screening. Mr. Duncan MacMillan explained that this property has been in their family for over CO years and has remained basically the same during this period of time and do not' plan or desire to change the nature of the property. He stated that the intent of th,-! recreational facility is strictly for family use noting they have taken great care, including filing a covenant pertaining to the use, to avoid any concerns from the community. There were no comm_nts from the public regarding this matter. Courici lmember Uoetten que:�t i,-.ied the location of the caretaker residence as opposed to being more centrally located. Mr. McNulty statcrci that proposed location seemed the most logical for mai nt er,ance functions and security. HINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 #1119 MACMILLAN CONTINUED Mayor Grabek expressed concern with restrictions to alleviate the possibilty of a future subdivision being this is a 13+ acre parcel in a 2 acre zone. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaff ron noted that the applicant's proposed covenant states if the property were ever sold or subdivided the recreational facility would remain with the main residence, however it does not state that the property would never be subdivided. Mr. Andrews stated he has submitted a proposed covenant to the City Attorney for her review but to date has not received a response. Mayor Grabek stated that he felt the proposal was compatible to this piece of property and that it would riot upset the environment and natural state, taking into consideration that this property could be developed into 7 two acre homes sites. City Administrn.tor Bernhardson stated that the nature of the structure mr.y ble A very well with this 13.5 acre parcel and with the appropriate screening and private covenants may be an acceptable product. However, the problem lies with any similar application on a .3-4 a, -re parcel where the applicant is willing to provide the same type of screening measures with equivalent hardships, the City may be hardpressed to deny a variance. Therefore, staff suggests doing an ordinance amendment which would scale the size of -the accessory structure over 1000 s.f. to the size of the property and sei.backs etc. Staff recommends this amendment procedure prior to approval of this application, which may delay approval of this plication until late June/early July. Mr. McNulty stated that this project would take appzoximately 5-6 months and they wanted it ready by winter.. Mayor Grabek questioned if there was some 4:ay to accomodate the applicant yet protect the City? City Attorney Barrett felt that either the variance would have to be grantee' or table for the amendment, anything in the interim or temporary would not be appropriate. Mayor Grabek noted that this application started in March and a great deal of work has been involved in finalizing it. to thf- City's satisfaction, which in fairness should not he delayed further. H MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCII. MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 #1119 MACMILLAN CONTINUED Councilmember Sime stated for all practical purposes he dial not see that the City would be inundated with requests and that this would not be setting a precedent. Councilmember Callahan agreed with Councilmember Sime regarding the need for such an amendment. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that because of the few applications per year for accessory structures over 1000 s.f., staff still felt it was appropriate to address those in an amendment. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peteison, to approve the variance and conditional use permit as proposed. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 1. Councilmember Callahan voted nay stating he had difficulty regarding the size and finding a real hardship involved in addition to his concern with the covenant and the future use. #1120 RICHARD RAGATZ 1945 CONCORDI_A STREET VARIANCE Richard Ragatz was present for this matte_ City TIministrator Bernhardson explained the .-equest for a per,tr :vent hardcover variance or for a four year period of t- ne which was tabled at the April 27th Council meeting for additional information from Assistant Zoning T.dministrator. Gaffron who handled this application and was not present at that meeting. Gaffron has since outlined in a memo the facts in this case, of which he stated that the issue of the addition was not part of the original application but was strictly an issue of side setbacks for the garage. Mr. Ragatz' original placement of the garage was to atroid a hardcover issue, however, Planning Commission requested the garage be moved further back which did create a need for a hardcover variance. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron's recommends that a permanent hardcover variance status not be granted, finding no hardships or unusual circumstances and finding that granting such a status would be in keeping neither with past practice nor with zoning code requirements. Mr. Ragatz was present for this matter and stated that he requested to build a new garage in the same location as it exists. The garage on the property is on his lot line. The Planning Commission recommended a more conforming location which created the problem of hardcover for a future -iddi+-ion. fie stated that the 9 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 #1.120 RAGATZ CONTINUED garage is not of interest to him if he cannot put on a room addition later, and that is why he brought up the hardcover and room addition issue at the Planning Commission meeting, in order to avoid a future problem. He felt Planning Commission led him to believe that their recommendation was valid for an undetermined amount of time. Assistant `boning Administrator Gaff.ron stated Planning Commission very likely did give the impression that an indefinite variance was being granted based on the discussions. Planning Commission member Taylor recollected that in exchange for moving the garage location to maintain some setback, Planning Commission would approve the additional hardcover needed for a future addition. He noted that the length of the variance was not discussed as in most cases because variances have always been valid for only one year. Planning Commission member Johnson agreed with Taylrr's recollection, however, he noted that Mr. Ragatz made it very clear the importance of a future addition. Councilmember Goetten stated that variances have always been valid for only one year and unfortunate that Mr. Ragatz may have been lead to believe otherwise. Councilmember Callahan stated that he was present at that Planning Commission meeting and understr,cd why the misunderstanding may have occurred but did not feel Planning Commission actually made a recommendation based on a time frame othor tnan one year. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to deny the request for a permanent variance. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1124 JIM AND RUTHANNE I.ANGE 4160 FOREST LAKE DRIVE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2.1b9 RuthAnne Lange was present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a lot area variance tc build on a substandard .lot in a sewered area. Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval. 0 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 #112.4 LANGE CONTINUED It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2169 approving the variance per the recommended conditions. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0, Abstention 1. Mayor Grabek abstained because he is an abutting property owner of the applicant. #1125 CHARLES B. REID 1400 BALDUR PARK ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2170 Charles Reid was present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a side setback variance and hardcover variance to construct an addition to the existing residence. Planning Commission recommended approval subject to applicant holding his 75-250' hardcover to no more than 40%. Applicant has since submitted a revised proposal with a 4' narrower addition, removing the sidewalk, and narrowing the driveway to the minimum usable width, ending up with 39.7% hardcover in the 75-250' zone. Councilmember Goetten commented on the attractiveness of upgrading donee in the Baldur Park Road area over the past few years. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2170 approving the variances per the revised plan in accordance with Planning Commission's recoi,+mendation. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1126 ROBERT GEHRMAN 4300 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2171 Robert. Gehrmzn was present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for construction of a family room addition requiring a side yard setback variance. Due to the septic drainfield location, County Road 6, and interior floor plan, there is no other possible location for the addition. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2171 granting the variance per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 #1129 TODD WATERS 3061 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2172 City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for hardcover., average lakeshore setback, deck in 0-75' setback variances; and to relocate municipal sewer line. Because applicant planned to replace the existing foundation, Planning Commission recommended that the house be moved back to make it more conforming. Mr. & Mrs. Todd Waters were present for this matter. Mr. Waters clarified to staff and Council that they proposed to move the existing house to another location in Mound, and build an entirely new house. He outlined the three issues: 1.. Hardcover variance in the 0-75': the existing house consists of 7.1% }.ardcover in the 0-75', proposal consists of 5.5% hardcover in the 0-75', a reduction of what currently exists. He noted that because of the the downhill slope, if the house were moved back any further, they would lose their view c.f the lake. 2. Average Lakeshore setback variance which is more restricted because of one of the adjacent houses sits relatively far back from the Lakeshore. 3. In order to properly locate the new house they must relocate the sewer line at their expense, and the costs and feasibility of that reloaction are a factor in the proposed house location. Councilmember Goetten felt that variance requests for an existing structure is a different issue than considering variances for a complete new structure, where the new structure could conform. Mr. Waters stated that the house was basically custom designed to fit the lot and to take advantage of the best lake views. Mayor Grabek stated that he felt the City was gaining because there will. be less encroachment with the new house than what currently xists, and that by rights applicant could re -build on existing foundation. Councilmember Sime concurred with Mayor Grabek. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to adopt Resolution 42172 approving the variances as proposed. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 1. Councilmember Goetten voted nay stating that the new structure rou ld conform with the setbacks. t1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 #1130 KEN AND RENEE EGGERT* 1371 REST POINT ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2173 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2173 granting vari.arces per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1131 GUENTHER NOELTING 1060 TONKAWA ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION #2174 Guenther and Gertrud Noelting were present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a conditional use permit to construct a permanent platform that is anchored or tied to the adjacent lake bank which consists of excavation within 75 feet of the lakeshore and concrete footings, of which platform will sustain a temporary dock. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron clarified that this platform will be over the existing rip -rap area. Mrs. Noelting stated that they had two permanent docks destroyed by ice and feel this proposal may solve their problem. City Engineer Cook recommended the use of a silt fence to control erosion during construction. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2' 1 approving the conditional use permit as proposed subject to supervision by staff. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1134 PAUL BASZUCKI 250 WAKEFIELD ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION #2175 Mr. Raszucki was not present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a conditional use permit to excavate a decorative pond area that is not a designated wetland. The DNR and City Fngineer Cook have recommended approval. It was moved by Mayor Grabe►c, seconded by Councilmember Si me, to adopt Resolution #2175 approving the conditional use permit. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 11 MINUTES OF THL REGULAR ORONO COUNCII. MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 #1135 ROBERT HANNING JR. 4220 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Robert and Julie Hanning were present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a conditional use permit for fill. along County Road 6 to create a berm for the purpose of noise control. Planning Commission recommended 3-3 to approve a maximum berm of 6' above the crown of the road with s.i.de slopes of 2:1 or f latter (two of the dissenting vo'_ers stated they would have no problem with the 11' high berm as proposed). Mr. Hanning explained that this is not a privacy fence but a legitimate sound i.., rrier .in which he felt would be aesthetically compatible with the area. He further explained that the traffic on County Road 6 is very heavy and noisy especially in the morning and evening. lie felt that the berm would eliminate approximately 2/3 of the noise. He noted that there are many comparable berms in Orono ranging to 15' in height that were constructed in the past few years. He did not feel that a 6' berm would eliminate the noise becaus(--. his house is located up on a hill. Regarding the grade, he proposer a 2:1 grade on the house side and would like to reserve the right for a 1:1 grade on the road side. He also noted that none of the neighbors have voiced any objection to his proposal. Counci.lmember Goetten asked the City Engineer fcr this opinion regardinu a berm for sound control and the recommenced height and grade. City Engineer Conk stated that_ an earth berm would best eliminate the sound, aesthetically a lower berm height would be more pleasing, and he re.comrrended a 3:1 grade in order to properly maintain. City Administrator Bernhardson noted that the berm in the recent Ulrich application wa limited to 3-1/2' above the crown of the road in con ju;;tion to the maximum height a fence could be allowed in that area. Dick Hegsel, owner of property to the north, was present and concurred that County Road 6 is very noisy. He does not oppose the plan nor does he feel it would be aesthet4.-ally unpleasinq. Mr. Henning was -pposed to a 3: 1 slope because an 11' high berm would b- at.)ut 100' wide. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING IiELD MAY 11, 1987 #1135 IIANNINL CONTINUED It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Counci lme.nber Sime, to approve the conditional use perinit for a maximum 6' high berm above the crown of the road (which is not to surpass the recommend height of an allowed fence) subject to: 1. Staff and Engineer to determine the slope ratio for proper maintenance. 2. Staff's recommended conditions. 3. Permit obtained by MCWD if necessary for the berm located near the wetland. Mrs. Hanning noted that there is a natural berm down the goad from their home that is 8' above the crown of the road. Councilmember Sime stated that lie would have concerns with allowing a berm over 6' high. Councilmember Peterson did not feel a 6' high berm would accomplish the needed noise control. Councilmember Goetten felt this was a unique situation and agreed that a 6' high berm would not solve the problem, therefore, this was a reasonable request. Motion, Ayes 2, Nays 3. Councilmembers Peterson, Goetten, and Callahan voted nay. Motion fails. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve a maxi-num berm of 11' above the crown of the road at a 2:1 slope per staff's recommer -onditions. Mayor Gr, tated that there is no documentation that an 11' hi rm would arromp1ish the needed noise control ar It an 11' berm would look like an 11' fence. Councilmember Callahan stated he would be in favor of a 6' berm but would like an expert opinion to be assured that if an 11' berm were permitted it would solve the problem. City Engineer Cook not d that an Environmental Engineer could c,ive an expert opinion on the noise control. Motion, A) es 3, Nay, Mayor Grabek and Councilmember ('allahan voted nay. :t ion passed. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING; HELD MAY 11, 1987 #1136 DICK HASSEL 840 HUNT FARM ROAD SUBG VISION CLASS III RESOLUTION #2176 Dick Hassel was present fog this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a subdivision replat. The purpose of replat is to redesignate Outlot D, Huntington Farm as a buildable pad within the existing PRD of 9 units. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmemter Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2176 approving the proposed subdivision replat as proposed. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #11.3:' MARC FRITZLER AND DESYL PETERSON 4385 CHIPPEWA LANE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2177 Applicants were not present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the re:luest for variG�ces for major rehabilitation of existing house in auditional to partial secon,' story addition, attached garage and porch to rear of hc.use. The house was placed on property prior to RR-lA zoning standards. Planning Commission recommended approval per staff's recommendations. It was moved by Co,incilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2177 approving the variances as proposed. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1151 ANN FISHER 774 TONKAWA ROAD RENEWAL VARIANCE WAIVER OF REQUIRED PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW Ann Fisher was not rresent for this matter. Councilmember Callahan stated he was opposed to waiving the required public hearing hefore the Planning Commission as a matter of policy. Councilmember Callahan moved to refer this application to the Planning c'ommissic;n through the normal r(,-)urse of procedure. h'::yor �,r<ihek secor;ded the mc`_ic;n for dis,-ussion. 14) MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COS ,.�_ ,_L MEETING BETA) MAY 11, 1987 #1151 FISHER CONTINUED City Adminx. gyrator Be hardr-on explained that trig_. na I ly P. side setback and aveiage lakeshor c setback variance was granted on July 22, 1985 to constrr-_:t an add- for to the lakeshore side of the house P {t._�t with a deck and screened .-)or�h attachment. %;pj:rant did not proceed with the .,n:tr.u.c.tion at thto time and has since as mided the �:lans so that the cur. e-w. Proposal only i •.volves the 8 f-e' principal structure addition and grade level deck llminating the need for the average lakeshoie setback. Not realizing that the variance ha6 lapsed, applicant engaged a builder to start constrlict_ion on June 1st. Because —iis -,.pp' 1.catic,n is a ienr• arianc-i in addition to 2du•-ir+ , she cope of the improvement plan, applicant ks c'-)uncil's corsideration by waiving the recuire� pui,. ,.c hearirg _ore the Pl:unning Commission:. t I recommends s •heduling the application as an 'r ormation and discussion item at the May 18th Plann :g Commission meeting for their recon.mendation and scheduling the required public hearing before the ,uncil at theit meeting of May 26, 1987. Planninu Commission membE•r `} is part cular appl- . at.i, .1 it would be acceptaL.le for as an information item. '': Zvi ous mo*ior. withdrawn. Tal l or st. ted that because is fair2v modest it impact nn.: g �. ^ r i _ ')n tc. view it wa move(, by Mayor Gratk )i. 34 by Counci imember Goetten, to approve the requt- f -isher to waive .eference to the Fl-inni )g Commissi ISection 10.0" ut-i,vision 3(A) for the formal re of her amends renewal variance appl' -."-ion and r—t staff to scl-i-dult. a public he, foh :o (.1 on May 5, 1987 at 7:00 Ayes 5, Nays 0. Co:neilmember Call, . as thF refer:al required a unrnimot. a opposed to waiving it did not want to s :: axon to the proeess if the • ;, of --l- n favor of waivi-a the "I... .'.Hit' S "HPORT: . RYS'V?,&. SAY bh'wER PROJUCT - „MAL* TABI.I:v TO JUNK 8, 1987 Tt was moved by Councrlmember Siwe, seconded by .ovnci In emb.-. Goetten, to table thi 5 matter until the Juro P, 1987 council meeting. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 17 MINUTES OF THE. REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL M ETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 OLD CRYST " BAY/WILLUW DRIVE C 'E.- ILAY - FINAL! It was mo,,eu by Councilmember Si.rr:e, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve final payment to Wm. Mueller & �Q-ns, Inc. for the Old Crystal Bay Road/Willow Drive project_ in the amount of $3,952.30. Motion, Aye,; 5, Nays 0. MAYOR'S REPO f' ADMINIsrw.•^R 73VALUATION AND COMPENSATION It was moved by Mayor Graben to approve a salary increase cr City Administrator Bernhardson of 6% as outlined in his memo dated May 6, 1987. Motion seconded by Councilmember Si.me. Discussion followed. Councilmember Peterson stated she felt 6% was excessive _onsider.ing the 7-1/2% sal-ary increase given to City Administrator Bernhardson last year, and also considering ` e fact that 'ill t.her City employees only received a 3,t ,Mary increase !s year. She also noted that opinion 3 based on con-iderable research done. Mayor Grubek stated that as with any other professi you get what you pay fcr and felt this parti<v.. discussion should have been brought up prior to this P-b li neeting. H stated that in his opinion, the 'r I objectives the City Administrator Bernhardson ak _ ,imp 1 ished in the short time he has been with Brio is remai- able rn addition to creating an ✓ironment within. the C t} st-,ff that has prevented the loss of other City employees. He noted that ::is recc. 'ation Look into consideration the discussions he hau .._th some of she City niployees. Councilmember Pet_;:r ,cn stated `hat she too talked .th tht:, d-partment he•-�?s, but fel it was being r•.^ -.e a corpor,iti.on rath, � a public servant position. Counci lmv-nmber Sing 4ted that he fe ,_ the City should be run , ry much 1: i;. t_:orporatlon. Couiici lmember Goet• rioted thrt in d-'sc jasior.s with various department heads, they fel t-he proms sed raise increase was fair. She notec that mcst City employees received a comparable worth salary increase. Councilmember Callahan felt that City Aaministrat•j. Bernhardson has assisted : hr Ott! in progressive goals in addition co turnir.q .r--und situation of deterioration that existed pricy to I employment, ane the:efore merits the salary increase Motion, Ayes 4, Nays I. Couri. ! lmember Peterson voted nay. 1b MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 TRANSPORTATION REPORT There was no Transpf-tation report. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: 4545 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - AC(ESS* It was moved by C ici_lmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goet'- a, that the Council table this matter of the access for the o.roperty at 4545 Wayzata Blvd. until Mal, 26, 1987. Mot,.on, Ayes 5, Nays 0. WAYZATA INSPECTIONS CONTRACT AMENDMENT City Administrator Bernhardson explained the proposed extension and mod.:fication of phasing out the building inspection services between the City of Orono and the City of Wayzata during the next 10 months. Curt Quady, 1223 Brown Road South, was opposed to "farming out" Orono'., inspector to the City of Wayzata when his services d-e needed in Orono. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the reasc,. Orono entered this contract was two -fold whi� ultimately benef itted both cities: 1. It allowed Orono's inspectors to obtain the opportunity to get some commercial construction experience which there is little of in ,rono. 2. Assisted Wayzata with their inspector who had the training but did not have the practical experience. It wi,s moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Sime, that. the Orono City Council agrees to approve Addendum 1 to the Wayzata/Orono Building Inspections Services Contract dated July 31, 1986. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. DESIGNATION OF DIRECTOR 6 ` ..TERNATE D'iKc.%:TJR TO MPRS* RESOLUTION #2.178 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2178 firsiarating Melvin Ki lho, Police Chief as Director and Mark .rnhardson, City Administrator as Alternate Dire ar tL. the Minnesota Police ,�cruitment System Boar( of Direv',vi . Mot.rn, : �-q ' 'ays 0. CITY FACILITIES SPACE S PULPY* TABLED TO MAY 26, 1987 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember roetten, that the City Council table this matter until the May 26, 1987 Council meeting. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 BIG ISLAND TOUR - Ml1Y 15, 1967* It was moved I ,-ouncilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember GoeI_Len, that the City Council acknowledge the scheduled date for the Big Island veteran's Vamp Tour as Friday, May 15, 1987 at 5:G;)' P.M. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. BOARD OF REV I Eti+l - MAY 13, 1987* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, that the Council acknowledge the established date for the Board of Review as Wednesday, May 13, .1987. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. OFF SALE LIQUOR LICENSE STEVE CORL/NAVARRE LIQUORS City Admiristrator Bernhardson stated that the lease has not. been finalized as planned, therefore recommends the issuance of license be contingent upon, finalization of lease, and the other items listed in proposed motion as follows: It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Mayor Grabek, Orono City Council issues an off -sale liquor license to Navarre Liquo: s effective 1 June 1987 to 31 December 1987 with issuance of license contingent upon finalization of lease, closing of the sale for the municipal liquor store, and receipt of the appropriate certificate of insurance together with the required band. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. POLICE/LELS 1987 CONTRACT* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilme-^-per Goetten, to accept the contract terms as presented .-or adoption of the 1987 Police Contract. Motion, Ades 5, Nays 0. 1987 HEALTH INSURANCE CONTRIBUTION* It was moved by Councilmember. Sime, seconded by C'ounc:l.m� ber_ Goetten, the Council authorize the increase •_.. health insurance for 1987 from the ini•cially established amoun`. of $161.00 to $11r.6.00 effective 1 January 1987 for those non-11,EIS employees with family coverage which represent. a $15.00 a month increase over the 1986 crntribution. Motion, Ayes 5, ":iys 0. CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ORDINANCE AND SUMMARY ORDINANCE* ORDINANCE NO. 35, SECOND SERIES It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, that the Orono City Council adopt Ordinance No. 35, Second Series as an amendment to r ion 9 and further au•tiorizes the adoption of hment B as a summary or Lance of Ordinance No. 35, ,nd Series for publication. t�-)tion, Ayes Nays 0. ?n MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 RESOLUTION OF SYMPATHY FOR THE WINTON 13UR14ASTER FAMILY* RESOLUTION #2179 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, that the Council adopt Resolution #2179 extending its sympathy and that of the City's to the family of Winton Burmaster. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. ROBIN MIRF.LSON - PROPOSED PAY INCREASE* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve a salary increase for the Finance Accounting C1.%rk, Robin Mikelson, from $1,500 per month to $1,625 per month effective April 1, 1987. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. _RMPORARY INCREASE IN HOURS - PART TIME CLERICAL* It- was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Counci.lmemb,=!i Goetten, that the Council authorizes the increase in hours up to an average 5 hours per week for the time period of 1 June to 31 August 1987 and approve a transfer from the contingency of $500.00 for funding of this increase in hours. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. HAZARDOUS BUILDING - SECURING OF UNSAFE BUILDING* 3645 NORTH SHORE DRIVE RESOLUTION #2180 It was moved by Counci1.ierber Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, that the Council adopt Resoluti.un #2180 initiating hazardous ruilding proceedings on the structure and securing the building against unlawful trespass. Motion, Ayes 5, Nabs 0. TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT - ORONO GOLF COURSE* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to employ John Ross and Jane 1)-laney as temporary counter helpers at. the Orono Golf Course at an hourly rat of $4.25 per hour effective May 12, 1.987. Motion, Ayr.s Nays 0. ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION -Councilmember Callahan asked City Administrator Bernhardson to comment. on the Long Lake Sewer Plant issue. City A,....,.nistrator t3ernhardson explained that a letter was. received from Mr. Rollin Lacy complaining about the storage on the sewer plant property by the City of Long Lake, a complaint that is shared by 16 Long Lake and Drono property owners in the immediate area. Orono staff is attempting to work with the City of Long Lake in the same manner as it would any other property owner on whom it receives a complaint of this nature. Staff is currently researching the legal aspects of the outside storage and it's impact on Orono's storage procedures. 21 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 11, 1987 ADMINISTRATOR'S LNFORMATION CONTINUED -Regarding the 200 Hollander Road issue, Councilmember Callahan recommended that staff continue to aim for a June court date to resolve this matter. Council accepted City t-r3ministrator Lernhardson's information report regarding: 200 Hollander Road, Long Lkae Sewer Plant Property, Metro Waste Interceptor, 1929 Fagerness Point, Minnesota Cities Managers Association Conference, and Orono Spring Clean Up. CITY A'M)RNEY' S REPORT: City Attorney Barrett request the Council enter into Executive Session at this time. LICENSES* BILLS* ADJOURNMENT 11:15 ATTEST: It. was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the following licenses: Residential kennel License - Wayr,e & Gayle Carrier, 12'r6 North Arm Drive Septic System Installer - Don's Backhoe & Exc. Garbage & Refuse Collector's License - Blackowiak & Son East Tonka Sanitation Solicitor's License Fabian S?afood, Tom Fabian Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. It was moved by Counci l,nember Sime, s�- .,jnded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve payment of the All Funds Accounts. Motion, Ayes- 5, Nays 0. P.M. it was moved Peterson, to at 11:15 P.M. by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember adjourn the regular Orono Council meeting Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. Doroth- M. Hailin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor 1.987 BOARD OF REVIEW MAY 13, 1987 The 1987 Board cf Review meeting was called to order by Mayor Grabek at 7:30 p.m., May 13, 1987. Councilmembers present were Goetten. Si.,�c, Peterson and Callahan. Also present from the City staff were City Administrator Bernhardson, Deputy Clerk Naab, City Assessors Rolf Erickson, and Assistants Dave Wilds and Rita Guderian. A slide presentation was given by the assessors ex AiAg the procedures of land valuation and calculations. Charles Miller of 253 Charles Street, Lony Lake was present regarding his vacant property at 324 Westlake Street, P.I.D. number 05-117-23 23 0011. Mr. Miller explained he owns this parcel of land which the City deemed to small to build on because of the septic requirements and the value has gone from $17,000 last year to $21,000. He feels this is too high for an unhuildabl.e parcel. Assistant Assessor Wilde stated he could not find a formal denial to build on this lot at the City Dff.ices. This vale is half of what the other lots in this area are valued at, and he does not want `o set a precedent. City Administrator suggested Mr. Miller make an appointment w.1th the City Zoning Department to review the property again for possible buildabilty. If it is then determined unbuildable, a resolution to that effect could be drafted and presented to Council. Mayor Gr.: moved, Councilmentoer Sime seconded, tc request assessor to evaluate ano wer value. After dis,ussion, motion was withdrawn. Councilmember Sime moved, Councilmember Goetten seconded, to reduce the market val-ie to $19,000, ref lecti.ng a 15 , increase over last year's value opposed to 23%. Ayes 5, Nays 0. Joy Jacob of 1225 Shoreline Vrive, PID number 02-il7-23 34 0002, was present to submit her name fo the Board to reflect her objection to her property value of $501,100. Last year it was valued at $500,600. Ms. Jacobs is preparing comparables and if she feels it necessary, will present these 1�o the County Board. Councilmember Sime moved, Councilmember Peterson seconded, to uphold the assessor's value of $501,100. Ayes 5, Nays 0. 1987 BOARD OF REVIEW - MAY 13, 1987 Todd Haugan and Teresa Ritten of 722 Tonkawa Road, PID number 05-117- 23 34 0001, objected tc their nroperty value of $147,500. They noted they clos-d on their home in March 1987 and had bought the home for $120,000 which included about $3,000 of personal prop(--rty and therefore, feels the home should be valued at 5117,000. Whey bought the home fro:a a relocation service which had the house listed with several real estate agents for over a year at a much higher price, and no one had bought it. Assistant Assessor Guderian noted that relocation services are noted for buying houses for a higher price and then selling at a much lower price. The properties in the area are valued in similar ranges as this property. This property, in pre ious years, had been valued at: 3986-87 at $134,400, and 1987 at 142,400. Assessor recommended reduction from $142,400 to $136,900. Mayor Grabek Roved to changE- the property value to previous years value of $136,900 lass the $3,000 personal property included ii the sale making tht, ma.rkP+ vF.lue $133, 900. Motion wi . _ Lwn. Mayor Grabek moved, Councilmember Goetten seconded, to uphold the assessor's valuation, of $136,900. Ayes 4, Nays 1. Councilmember Sime objected stating the property had exposure to t:hP selling market and sold at $120,000 a iO what is what it should be val!.-ed at. Also, the lot is quite stee, -wr, the lakeshore, making it leas desrable. John Quam of 3760 Northern Avenue, PID number 17-117-23 34 0051, stated the market value for his house this, year is $86,600 and it should be reduced to $70,000 because it is a new house and was built for much less. He noted the house was built for $66,700 ($16,000 of which was for the land). Mr. Quam also felt the railroa(i tracks across the street, the County shop near the home, and the value of the older cottage homes in the area should reduce his value. Assessor Erickson noted he did review the Property and classified the construction 1 step above average, also the ay. rage value of a buildable lot is $20,000, and, therefore, felt the $19,000 value for Mr. Quam's land is reasonable. Erickson also explained that there l.r a varied price range within the building industry for construction prices. Councilmember Callahan move., Councilmember Sime seconded, to reduce the market value to $80,000. Ayes 5, Nays 0. Newell weed, 1385 Orono Lane, PID number 02-117-23 34 0003, explained his assessed value for this year is $375,800 which reflects a 271 increase in the last two (2) years and would li' *o gee it reduced to $355,000 which would be a 20% increase. Mr. weed iced thet the ',ruse is 60 years old and is in need a continuous maintenan,-e. tie also stated the values of past years: 1985 $120,800; 1986 $37-1,300, 1487 $375,800. 1987 BOARD OF REVIEW - MAY 13, 1987 Assessor Erickson explained that last year all lakeshore property was increased based on sales in the area. Fie also noted that Mr. Weed's property has approximately 175 feet of lakeshore and is a very nice location. Mayor Grabek moved, Councilmember Sime seconded, to uphold the assessor's valuation of $375,800. .Ayes 5, Nays 0. Jack Birch, 825 Forest Arms PID number 07-117-23 12 0011, stated his market value is at $194,600 year. Last year it was $124,600 which is a 56% increase. Also, last y-ar the land value was $50,000 and this year it is valued at $70,OOC which is a 38% increase. He feels that the property should be valued at $150,000 and one reason for this is the lakeshore is iml assable to boat traffic because thf lake is so low. The channel will need to be dredged to be usable again, Assessor Erickson stated he reviewed the p operty when the lake was frozen over arJ vas unaware at that time of the lake level, however, the valuation cannot be reduced because of a one year lake level and should that 'level remain for a period of time or be deemed permanent, it may then be reduced after review. Also, the valuation is based on sales in the area during the 1985-86 time period. Erickson also noted that when a house is valued before it is completed, the valuation is -sually low because it is hard to judge the amount of finishing work which will. be completed. Councilmember Callahan moved, Councilmember Peterson seconded, to uphold the assessor's valuation of $194,600. Ayes 5, Nays 0. Gregory Price of 890 Forest Arms Lane, is the owner of property at 835 Forest Arms Lane, PID number 07-117-23 12 0012, explained his market value this year is $145,200 and is still under construction. He also stated that last year the lot alone was $45,OOC and this year the value is $70,000 which is a 50% increase. He would like to see the lot value reduced to $551000. Price noted thal- he paid ;162,000 for the lot in January 19e6 and it is one acre. Councilmember Callahan moved, Councilmember Sime seconded, to uphold assessor's va 1 uat 4 on of $145, 200 for the property. Ayes 5, Nays 0. 1987 BOARD OF REVIEW - MAY 13, 1987 The following people were not present for the :meeting but wished their request be brought up to the Boay in opposition to the market value on their property. Steven Lisle of 233 Northgate Road, PID number 36-118-23 41 0049, market value of $303,000 and would like it- to be $285,000. Assistant Assessor Wilde re iewed this property and determined the estimated finished basement square footage was not as large as first indicated. Assessor Wilderecommended lowering the value to $285,000. Coun,.:ilmerr;ber Simi moved, Councilmember Goetten seconded, to accept the assessor's recommendation to lower the value to $285,000. Ayes 5, nays 0. Gary Peterson, 40 Smith Avenue, PID number 02-117-23 21 0002, market value $137,300 would like it lowered to $125,900. Assessor E-icks stated that there has been an error in calculation and the value should oe at $125,900. Mayor Grabek moved, Councilmember Sime seconded to reduce the market value, to $125,900. Ayes 5, nays 0. Woodhill. Country Club, 200 Woodhill Road, 02-117-23 12 0001 valued at $765,600; 02-117-23 43 0008 valued at 14,000; 02-117-23 4.3 0008 valued at 18,000. They would like these values reduce . Mayor Grabek mover.'., Councilmember Peterson seconded, to uphold the assessor's valuation as noted above. Ayes 5, nays 0. C. Wayne LeNeave, 990 '`�d Long Lake Road, PID number 36-116-23 31 0015, market '•'lue $424,9uC d would like it to gyred. Last year it was valued at $3Cd,500. Assistant. Assessor Guder4+n noted the major increase was the Location on the golf course, and explained sales in this area have increased. Mayor Grabek moved, Counci irrember Pete -son seconc?ei, to uphold the assessor's valuation of $424, 900. Counci lmemll- r 5ime. mov,.-d, Counci lmenibe=r C•oetten seconded, to adjoin the 1987 r'c a..i3 of key- at 9. 40 p.m. Ayes nay:: 0. 4 To: From: Date: Mayer Grabek Or.onu Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator May 19, 1987 Subject.: #990 Ward Ferrell, 3405 Watertown Road - Variance - Continuation of Review Tabled by Council on 6/9/8t at Applicant's Request Zoning District. - RR-1B, 2 unsewered Summary - Mr. Ferrell is regresting variances to build houses on each of two vacant lots he owns adjacent to his residence. The lot his house exists on is 1.01 acres. The oth( two lots are 0.85 acre and 1.04 acres respectively, excluding road Light -of -way. on 4/128/86 Council voted 5-0 to direct staff to craft a resolution of denial. At applicant's request, the application was tabled on 6/9/86 and applicant has only now requested a re- opening of the application. List of Exhibits - (Chronological) Exhibit A - 8/4/66 T.pplicant's Draft Letter to Neil Murray t sent) Exhibit B 5/9/86 Council Minutes Exhibit C - /28/86 Council Action Notice Exhibit D - 5/27/86 Council Minutes Exhibit E - 5/21 /95 Staff Memo/Draft Denial Resolution Exhibit F - 5/ _. uncil Mir.ut,,�s Exhibit G - -r/.., ')tice of Council Action •hibit H - 4/26/86 Council Minutes i.x: ibit I - 4/24/86 Notice of. Council Action Exhibit J - 4/14/86 Council Minutes Exhibit K - 3/14/86 Staff Memo - Minutes of 1974 Rezoning Hearing -Similarly Situated Properries Exhibit L - 3/11/86 Notice of Council Action Exhibit M - 3/10/86 Council Minutes Exhi!,i.t N - 3/3/86 Staff Memo & Speci.fiOd Exhibits N/A - Applications N/B - Plat Map N/C - Proporty owners List N/D - 2/20/85 Notice to App]iC"O,t. N/E - Compc)sitc Site Plan N/F - Survey, Soils, Site fix) -t il),i NIG - Canter I.ot N/ H - U e s t. L. o'.- N/I pry, 1974-1985 N/J - _ nial ResoIt,tion, 111,0 _c ! s i m i A.ar I Exhibit 0 - 2118,,86 Plar:ninq ion r!inut, Exhibit P - 2/6/85 Staff Memo Zonir•7 file #990 Ma, 1987 Pac, of t Exhibit Q - I_/18/I.:5 Ilann-nq Commi,•sion Minutes Exhibit R - 11/13/85 :_*Itaf ;::imo Exhibit S - 5/28/85 Counc_ ''.nutes E;:hibit T - `/13/R5 Counci- mutes Ex: ibit U - 4/30/85 Staff M:.,-o Exhibit V - 4/1--/85 Plannin-► -4i.or, Mirtiites Exhibit W - 4/8/85 Staff "�Hr Exhibit X - 2/27/85 Letter t; ,Exhibit Y - 2/20/95 Application 903, Plat Map, Survey, Site Plan Exhibit Z-1 - 10/26/81 A.P. Olscn Letter to Derrell Exhibit Z-2 - 9/29/81 Ferrell Letter to City Exhibit �,-3 - 10/12/59 Ordinance No. 22 Exhibit Z-4 - 10/13/58 Buildinq Permit_ 3405 Waterto%tin Road Exhibit Z-5 - 9/22/58 Council Min-ates Ex' ;pit `I,-6 - 9/12/55 Ordinance No. 7 Exhibit Z-7 - 7/10/50 7oninc? Ordinance '950 NOTE: KEEP ALL EXHIBITS FOR FUTURE REFERENCE!!! Discussion - I would first refer you to Exhibit R, the staff memo of 11/13/85, for a discussion of the request. Also the memo and exhibits of 3/3/86, (Exhibits N and N/A through N/J). Finally, review the minutes and exhibits from March through June 1986. The memo of 5/:21/R6 outlines Council's procedural options and i.ncluder a draft denial resolution which has yet to be adopted. Applicant has submitted no T irniormat:ion except an August 4, 1986 draft letter to Neil Murray cf K: -TV which was distributed by applicant to one or more new CouncilmembeYs over t'ie winter. Staff Recor *nendation - Applicant plans to i,e present to i his request with C . cil. Staff considers the recommendatioi►s of +./86 (Exhibir F,) as Mill appropriate. t;` 'H, S-t9-87 August 4, 1986 Mr. Neil rurray ,��+' '4X On Your Behalf KSTP-TV 3415 University Ave, W. St. Paul, MN 55114 Ueac Mr. Murray: My name is Ward P. Ferrell and I reside at 3405 Watertown Road, Long Lake, in the City of Orono. I am 63 and my wife is 64. I am writing about a problem my wife ana I are havirg with the City of Orono in trying to bi '.d our retirement home. In 1948 bought a home with a little over four acres of land. Then in 8 we decided to build a second home. I first went to George Hansen, the City Assessor, in August of that year to get a building permit. I was informed, at that time, I needed to go in- stead to the City Council. When I met with the Orono City Council all council members were in favor of approval of my request for a buildirg permit except Mr. Bagley. The reason for his not approving ray request had something to-do with having two homes on one piece o` -operty. BUS at that time this was a common practice in this ar The motion wa6 tabl- ed at this meeting until the city could c ' their lawyer. Mayor Herb Ross, now deceased, said that he would get back to me. By the end of SeptelTILer I had not heard from the City Council, so I contacted Nor. Ross and told him I -ould wait no longer and had to start building. About 2-3 weeks later Mayor Ross called and said I could pick up my building permit. Also at this time, Mayor. Ross asked if I would consider dividing the property in order to avoid _`uture trouble. My wife and I decided to divide the lard as Mayor Ross requested. The building code requirement for lot size in 1958 was one acre. The City Assessor, George Hansen, told me that the lot width size requirement was 140 feet. Mr. Hansen also knew that the shade of the property was triangular. Here is how the four acres were divided in 1958: The land was divided at 150 feet (west lot) because of the sewer.. One acre plus - 140 feet, one acre plus - 140 feet, almost one acre with road, which was common practice. Then263 feet (far east lot) with the small end of the triangle. All four lots nave an abstract title and are registered in Hennepin County. If Mayor koris were now li tngs I 3m sure he would be able to verify the conversations and the c-1 nts at the time I divided the property. In 1974, the City of Orono changed its building code to require a minimum land size of two acres with a 200 foot width. At a public meeting in .he schoolhouse a spokesman, Mr Van Ness, speaking for the City of Orono, emphasized that all existing lots would not be affected by the 1974 building code change. This is the enunciation of public policy in a public facility, and by a public official. The rights of my wife and I to build on our property between 1967 and 1975 - without variances, were turther asserted by Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron, as recently as April 15, 19L.5, during a Planning Commission meeting. The City of Orono has levied taxes and has accepted tax payments of these lots, as buildable lots since 1974 and as recently as 1982. (See att&ched Tax Valuation history Chart.) The continuing adverse rulings of the current Orono City Council to deny us our building permit is in contravention of earlier agree- ments between myself and the City of Orono. The intent and the application of the 1974 building code change was made clear by Mr. Van Ness at a public meeting in 19741. This is reflected by the city's tax valuation and assessment of our property for 1974 through 1982. In 1974, the City of Orono wisely refrained from the retroactive application of zoning law change to prevent any hardships on existing property owners and to presumably avoid the implementation of an cx post facto law. Succeeding Orono City Councils and City Administrations have sustained this ruling through 1982, by property valuation and acceptance of tax payments based upon the 1974 Orono City Council ruling. (See attached Tax Valua- tion History Chart.) In 1982, the Orono City Council changed its mird about the status of the property owned by us. Since this time, the city has devalu- ed the property and has effectively, declared it to be unbuildable. The retroactive application the 1974 zoning law change, has caused considerable hard3hip for us. The continued refusal of the City of Orono at City Council meetings to grant us a bu 'liing permit; continues to add to the stress, hardship and expen:,e of this situa- tion. Article 1, Section 9 of the United States Constitution specifically prohibits action such as these of the current Orono City Council by stating: "No bill of attainder, or ex post facto law shall be pass- ed." In a democratic form of government, this f_}rovision should be applicable to the Orono City Council, as well as to the United :hates Cor:3ru._ . The following tactz. :;j.eci1.icaIly show the :.rpe of run-around we are getting from theE crono City Council about our property: -2- The Orono City Council requested of all the property in question. the present home is located. The a survey taken in 1958. This is original four acres. that I furnish them with a survey This includes the lot on which City Council was furnished with the year in which we split the The Orono City Council also requested PERK (soil perculation) Tests for all the property, including the present homesite sewer system. These tests were done and the reports were given to the city. I also took them to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, George Johnson, to get their opinion. The soil samples 1-.!re rated "Excel- lent" and approved by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The City of Orono said that I wcald need a Mound System. However, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency said that that would not be nec- essary. The City of Orono has been extremely closeminded about listening to me. When I first went to the City, they said "No", without explan- ation. Mr. Adams, an Orono City Council member, said to me that the present City Council doesn't have to honor any coaimitme.ts/agree--- ments of any previous City Council or City Official. We want to build on one lot, give one to one of our daughters and sell the present home so that we may have a retirement home paid for. All of my neighboring property owners have signed a petition apprcv- ing my request to build. The only people oppose to my plans are the City Council and Planning Commission. The property division agreement was made between myself, my wife, Mayor Herb Ross and the Assessor of the Village, George Eansen. This agreement was a gentlemans agreement (handshake). There is nothing on the records at the City Council or Planning Commission meetings. 1. was never told to see anyone before dividing the property. I have lived here since 1936. I have owned and raid all the taxes on this prcperty since 1948. I divided the property as requested by the Mayor and Assessor. Keeping it for our retirement home. Now what? NOTHING. We have planned and worked for this for 26 years. Please advise me what I can do in this matter. Sincerely, Ward P. Ferrell 3405 Watertown Road Long Lake, MN 5535 Phone: 612-473-9709 Encl.: Tax Valuation t3i .;tor} Ch.irt - furni: t,ed by City of Orono Registered Lane. -;urvc,y ,:i?. ;� 3 10 nt �44 14 X 71, r f4t Op MO 300 bc r ti -"0 2530.1 IA,-37ss 7 ISTERED LAND SURVEY. NO.S4o 11 ► t t Exhibit J y TAX VALUATION HISTORY Ward Ferrell, 3405 Watertown Road It vacant vacant with house vacant 1.07 acres 0.85 acre 0.91 acre 0.10 acre YFAR PTD 0007 PID 0008 , PID 0009 PID 0010 MFT VALUE. TAX MFT VALUE. TAX MKT VALUE,* TAX** MKT VALUE TAX TOTAL TAX (Before Homeste 1985 5,000 198.60 ;'5,000 198.60 25,000 2,064.62 200 7.94 2,469.76 1984 5,000 205.54 5,000 205.54 /25,000 2,121.22 200 8.22 2,540.52 i083 5,000" 193.50 5,000 193.50 25,000 2,097.92 200 7.74 2,492.66 ----------------------------- I=------------------------------------------------------------------- 1982 10,400 384.30 6,600 243.88 14,100 1,628.12 220 8.12 2,264.42 1981 10,400 354.32 6,600 224.86 14,200 1,534.20 220 7.48 2,120.86 1930 9,200 2.83.98 5,800 2.12.98 13,960 1,596.70 200 5.82 2,099.48 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (12,500)*** 1979 5,100 198.42 5,100 198.42 .7,070 1,674.92 120 3.88 2,075.64 (51900) 1978 4,600 183.90 4,600 183.90 6,240 1,688.56 110 3.96 2,060.32 (5,300) 1977 4,200 169.46 4,200 169.46 4,740 1,657.63 110 4.04 2,000.59 ---------------------------------------------------------------- (4,235) 1976 3,500 151.78 3,500 151.78 **** ----------------------------------- 1,460.46 90 3.92 1,767.94 1475 3,2.00 1.54.14 3,200 154.14 **** 1,457.43 90 4.36 1,770.07 1974 3,200 1,41.38 3,200 141.3E **** 1,341.98 90 4.00 1,628.74 *Market value of land portion only "Tax on land and structures ***Number in parentheses is Limited Value of land portion; Market Value number was calculated Using the formula: Limited value of land portion MKT VALUE =---•-------------------------------- x MKT VALUE land and sti Limited value of land and structure CAR r a -r,-1;47 MINUTES OF THE REGUTAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 9, 1986 ATTENDANCE 7:04 P.M. The Orono Council met on the above dice with the f--lowing members present: Acting Mayor Adams, Counci.lmembers Grabek, Frahm, and Hammerel. Mayor Butler was absent due to illness. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Peterson. City Attorney Blatz was also present. CONSENT AGENDA* It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to approve the Consent Agenda* as submitted. Motion, Ayes 4, Nay- 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to approve the minutes of the May 27, 1986 Council Meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to approve the minutes of the 1986 Board of Review Meeting held on May 27, 1986 as submitted. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS There were no continents from the Park Commission at this time. PTANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Planning Commission member J. Diann Goetten was present and had no comments at this time. PUBLIC COMMENT, There were no comments from the public at this rime. ZONING AD STRATOR'S REPORT: WARD FERR 3405 W ROM; VARIANCE DENIAL RESOLUTION City Administrator Bernhardson reviewed the throe options in this application: 1. Adopt denial Resolution as drafted. 2. Table the matter indefinitely upon request by applciant. 3. Allow the applicant to revisr- his application to a 1-additional-buildinq-site request. 1 141NUTE' OF 'fill: REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNh 9, 1986 99U WARD FERRELL continued Ward Ferrell and his attorney, Jerry Rice, were present for this matter. Mr Rice stated that he is familiar with the area in question because he lives in the area and also holds a contract for deed on property across the road from applciant's. He stated that he haE. researches] the matter and feels there i:; a substantiU 1 issue of equitable estoppel involved and that this is a special situation based on an old promise by a Mayor. He stated that Mr. Ferrell is prepared to proceed with a legal suit if necessary. Councilmember Frahm asked applicant if he wanted the Council to act on the request for three lots, not considering any alternatives. Mr.. Ferrell stated that was correct.. Mr. Rice stated that they would be agreeable to Council tabling the request in order for Council to think about it. City Attorney Blatz %,;anted the -ecord clarified regarding the apparent conversation between Mr. Fcr.ell and Planning Commission. member VanNest, she noted that the record was researched and found no indication that word was given to Mr. Ferrell that he could plat his property accordingly and the code would not apply to him. She also noted that there is case law whereas the court ruled that regardless of 4 ications made by a past council, the cur -rent col!.. L1 must uphold the ordinances. Mr. Rice clarified that hE. was referring to the word given by Mryrr Ross when: Mr. Ferrell platted his property. Acting Mayor Adams stated that he was always told that one council can not bind future councils. It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Grabek, to approve the denial resolution as drdited to be adopted June 9, 1Qa6. At this point, Mr. Ferrell and his attorney were given the opportun4ty to request tabling this matter to reconsider the request for 2 additional houses. Mr. Rice stated that he would like the matter tabled in order for him to consult with his client, Mr. Ferrell. City Attorney Blatz stated that she would recommend tablinq the matter if the Council's intent is to allow applicant to modify his application for 1 additional house to be constructed on his property. INUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCII. MEETING HELD JUNE 9, 1986 #990 D FERRELL continued Councilmember Frahm withdrew his motion. It was moved by Councilmember Hammerel, seconded by Councilmember Adams, to table this matter at this time. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. #991 & #1018 WILLIAM J. ULRICH 1535 b 1595 BOHN'S POINT ROAD AFTER -THE -FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS RESOLUTION 12004 City Administrator Bernhardson reviewed the conditional use permits and variances and the drafted resolution addressing the following items: berms are limited to 3- 1/2' with no fences on them, staff has devised standards for the drainfield and the plan will be approved in accordance with those standards, alteration of the laq_oon, fill between the the two properties, and letter of credit anI developers agreement has been secured. Staff recommends adc:Dtion of the resolution. He noted that Planning Commission will review the requests for a geothermal system and extension of seawall in lagoon at their June 16th meeting. Present representing applicant were: Attorney Gregory Halbert, :purveyor Mark Gronberg, and Engineer Don Brauer. Mr. Halbert stated that they have reviewed the proposed resolution and request amendment of Condition #3 being that the former residence on Lot 2 must be removed by July 1, 1986. He stated that they are currently using the house for storing materials, housing and sanitation, facilities for the laborers, therefore requesting that they allow the house to remain until September 1, 19BG subject to keeping the property neat and orderly. Staff stated that they had no problem with that request. City Administrator bernhardson rioted that they have not received any more complaints reaardin3 the construction hours. t w.zs roved by Acting Meyer Adams, seconded by Counci lmorr.!-,er }iamrnerel, t(--1 adopt Resolution 02004 apjli-o.vin(i the ;rtc r-ttic:r-rlct conditional use permits and .ri +:.cc: �r�rndi_r1q t1F iat. cn Conc:iticr o3 to September ll EXH. Cr ZONING FILE NOl"990 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of. Notice: 5/28/86 ------------------------------------------------------------------ TO: Ward Ferrell COPIES: 3405 Watertown Road Long bake, MN 55356 ------------------------------------------------------------------ TYPE OF APPLICATION: XX Variance ------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Date of Meeting: 5/27/86 Vote: 5 For 0 Against. COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: Table at apolicant's request until the Monday, June 9, 1986 Council meeting. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minu.es, they are available from the City Recorder or City Clerk aftez review and approval Y,-7 the Planning Commission. MINUTES OF THE RPGUI,AR ORONO LOUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 27, 1.986 ATTENDANCE 8:213 P.M. The Oron• Council met on the above date with the following members present: mayor Butler, Councilmembers Grabek, Frahm, Adams, and Hammerel. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson, Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Peterson. City Attorney Barrett was also pr^sent. CONSENT AGEND:�* It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to approve the Consent Agenda* ,,.s submitted. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Courici lmember Harnmere l , to approve the Minutes of the regular May 12, 1986 Council "?eeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the public at this time. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: #990 ARD FERRELL WATERTOWN ROAD VARIANCE - DENIAL RESOLUTION Air. Ferrell was present and requested that this matter be tabled 'because: his attorney was unable to attend this meeting. It was moved by Councilmember Adams, seconded by Councilmember Grabek, to table this ratter until the June 9th Council meeting. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays C. #991 AND #101.8 WILLIAM J. ULRICH* 1535 AND 1595 BOHN'S POINT ROAD AFTER---THE-FACT CONDITIONAI. USE PERMITS Upon staff —commendation, it was move,i by Councilmember Frahm, sc . (l by Counci lrr mber 1ammerel, to table this matter Ln,._ the June 9th Council rreeting pending adciit ioi)-il it for,o.aticn.. "'otion, Ayes 5, Nays C. 1999 BELDP.N/MELINF. 3598 NORTH SHORE DRIVE VARIANCE: DENIAL RESOLUTION ,_,. t [' i`1 1can t Bann Belden and 1:.:i.. ti: l ,t.>, �•t r �'t , C c.`rl %,sslstant Zoninq ik.r mini�A't'0 r t;;rf; r.:'ri r' t!at this matter be illy apr! l i cant s. EXH. E To: Orono Council Members From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator Date: May 21, 1986 Subject: #990 Ward Ferrell 3405 Watertown Road - Variance -a - Denial Resolution Attached is a resolution for denial of thc: variance requested by Mr. Ferrell to construct. 2 additional ouses on his property. The Counci l's procedural options i:re as follows: 1. Adopt the denial resolution as drafted. In this case, Mr. Ferrell would have to wait 6 months before he could reapply for the variances, if he so wished, per Section 10.08, Subdivision 5. 2. 'fable the application indefinitely. This would be advisable only if the applicant requests a tabling teased on additional substantial evidence he wishes to present. 3. Al.lew the applicant to revise his application to a 1- additional-building-site request, if he wishes, which some members of Council have indicated would be looked upon more favorably. In this case, Council could either cease action on the denial resolution, or adopt a revised denial resolution which denies the 2-additional lot request but finds that: the revised request is a change of conditions which was recommended for approval by the Orono Planning r-mmission at. their February 18, 1986 meeting, hence, the 6-month relapplication moratorium would be waived. Allowing such a revision of the application does not. commit the Council to approving the 1- additional lot request. Staff would recommend that if applicant sloes wish to revise his request, the application be referred back to the Planning C_-)mnlissian for further review. Staff would suggest the following language be incorporated into the resolution ,:, item 041 if ycu choose A• tion 1 above: k. , , ) 41. At the City Council meeting of 1986, the applicant was advised of the options to a) table if he has additional substantial evidence to submit; or b) to revise his application to request only 1-additional lot on the 2.9 acre parcel instead of 2-additional lots; or c) choose neither and waive any right to further review of this application by the City Council. The applicant chose to waive further Counci 1 review of th- application. (Attt)r#.ie11 14 / `r r I I C h+uT T 1C. `Gru ,� F �VAN�L (o-`l Y A RESOLUTION DENYING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE NO. 990 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State Statutes 412 et. seq. and 462 et. seq. the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted zoning regulations for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, Ward Ferr (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of property located at 3405 Watertown Road within the City of Orono and legally described as follows: Ps ..CEL 1 That part of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 32, Township I1�N, Range 23W, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the South line of said Southeast quarter, 50 rods West of the Southeast corner thereof; thencr west along said South line 263 feet; thence North at right an, _les to said South line to the public road; thence Southeasterly along said road to a point directly North of the point of beginning; thence South to the point of beginning. (Also known as P.I.D. #32-118-23 44 0009); and That part of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 32, Township 118N, Flange 23W, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the South line of said Southeast quarter, 50 rods West of the Southeast corner thereof; thence North 6 rods to the center of the public road; thence Southeasterly along said road to the South line of said Section 3; thence west. to the point of beginnir,q; excluding the public road. (Also known as P.Z.D. #32- 118-23 44 0010); and PARCEL 2 That part of the Southeast quarter of Section 32, Township 118N, Range 23W, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South line of said Southeast quert-r, 1088 feet West of the Southeast corner thereof; thence hest along said South line 140 feet; therice North at right angles to said South line to the public road; thence Southeasterly along said road to its intersection with a line drawn North through the point of beginning at right angles to tht South line of said Southeast quarter; thence South to the point of beginning. (Also known as P.I.D. 032-118-23 44 1008); and Page 1 of 9 PARCEL 3 That part of the Southeast quarter of Section 32, Township 118N, Range 23W, described as follows: Begin i_ng at a point on the South line of said Southeast quarter, 1228 eet West of the Southeast corner thereof; thence West along said South line 140 feet; thence North at right angles to said South line to the public road; thence Southeasterly along said road to its intersection with a line drawn North through the point of begin.nirl at right angles to the South line of said Southeast quarter; thence South to the point -)f beginning. (Also known as P.I.D. #32-11.8-23 44 0007); and WHEREAS, for discussion purposes the property has been defined as 3 separate parcels as described above and per Exhibit A attached; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the C- ty for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of a principal residence structure on a lot containing approximately 1.04 acres or 52% of the required 2.0 acres in area and 140 feet or 70% of the required 200 feet of lot width (Parcel 3); and to further permit the construction of a principal residence structure on a lot containing approximately 0.85 acres or 42.5% of the required 2.0 acres in area and 140 feet or 70% of the required 200 feet of lot width (Parcel 2); and requesting Council approval per. Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (C) to separate non -conforming, undeveloped, substandard, contiguous, unsewered lots of record under common ownership, which separation would result in individual building sites not satisfying the lot area and lot width standards of the Zoning Chapter of the Orono Muncipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the application; the recommendations of staff and the Planning Commission; comments of the neighboring property owners; and materials and comments made by the applicant and applicant's attorney. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby denies the requested lot area and lot width variances and denies the request to separate the commonly owned lots for the property described above based upon one or more of the following findings of fact concerning this property: FINDINGS 1. As of January 1, 1975, the property has been zoned RR-lB, Rural Residential Zoning District, requiring a minimum lot size of 2.0 acres in area and 200 feet minimum width. Based on the required performance standards for the RR-1B zoning district, the proposed use of the property for 2 new residential building sites in addition the one existing building site would require the followinq variances: Page 2 of 9 Parcel 1 (with exiting house) a) Lot Area Required = 2.0 acres Existing = 1.01 acres or 50.5% Variance = 0.99 acres or 49.5% Parcel 2 (vacant) a) Lot Area Required = 2.0 acres Existing = 0.85 acres or 42.5% Variance = 1.15 acres or 57.5% b) Lot Width Required = 200 feet Existing = 140 feet or 10% Variance = 60 feet or 0% Parcel 3 (vacant) a) Lot Area Required = 2.0 acres Existing = 1.04 acres or 52% Variance = 0.96 acres or 48% b) Lot Width Required = 200 feet Existing = 140 feet or 70% Variance = 60 feet or. 30% 2. The property consists of 4 separate tax parcels which are contiguous and which are owned in common by the a-cl icant. The property in total contains approximately 2.90 acres -.end has a width it excess of 500 feet, in both respects meeting tt.e area and width requirements for the single existing residence on the nroperty. 3. Prior to January 1, 1975, the property was zoned R-lC, effective since September 14, 1967, a residential. zone requiring a minimum of 1 acre in area and 140 feet minimum. width. 4. Prior to September 14, 1.967, the pr—perty was include' within the "Stubbs Bay Zoning District", effective since July 1 1950, a residential. zone requiring a minimum building lot size of 1 acre in area. 5. The applicant purchased the property in August 1948. 6. Frior to 1958, the property was undivided and contained approximately 4.19 acres and contained only the residence located at 3425 Watertown Road. Page 3 of 9 7. On September 22, 1953, the City Council approved the request of Mr. Ferrell to construct a second residence on the undivided property. The request was granterl subject to approval of the Planning Commission. Subsequently, Jr. Ferrell was issued a building permit to construct a new residence on October 13, 1958, which residence is now known as 3405 Watertown Road. B. Sometime during 1958-1QS9, Mr. Ferrell subdivided the property so that 3425 Watertown Roa6 was contained within a separate 1.29 acre parcel, the new house at 3405 Watertown Road was located on a 1.01 acre parcel (Parcel 1 per attached Exhibit A), and 2 additional parcels (Parcels 2 and 3 per Exhibit A) were created between 3405 and 3425 Watertown Road. 9. Mr. Ferrell. has retained ownership of Parcels 1, 2 and 3 since their creation as a result of the 1958-59 subdivision. 10. On March 18, 1985, Mr. Ferrell requested City staff to accept a variance application for approval to construct a new home on ParcZ 1. 3. At staff's recommendation, Ferrell submitted the application as a zoning appeal in order to be granted a timely review and recommendation by the Planning Commission without submitting the complete survey and soil testing intormation required. 11. Pursuant to the zoning appeal •Dlication, the Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on th:s i,,_,tter, Application No. 903, on April 15, 1985. The Planning Commission confirmed that many variances were necessary in order to build on either of Parcels 2 or 3 and the Planning Commission gave the applicant the general direction that Planning Commission would likely only recommend approval of one new house, and only if Parcels 2 and 3 were combined. 12. The zoning appeal was reviewed by the City Council. on May 28, 1985, and the Counci 1 z.ffirmed staff's interpretation of the zoning code that m-ny variances would be necessary in order to build on both vacant lots, and at that meeting certain individual Council members stated they would likely consider one additional building site but not two. 13. On October 9, 1985, Mr. Ferrell submitted a formal application for v iances to build new homes on Parcels 2 and 3. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the matter on November 18, 1985, and tabled the application pending submittal of additional required survey and soil testing information for the existing house on Parcel 1. 14. C February 18, 1986, the Planning Commission again reviewed the compl--ed application. The Planninq Commission unanimously recommc Jed denial of 2 new building sites but recommended approval of 1 new building site using the combined Parcels 2 and 3. Page 4 of 9 15. The City Council reviewel the application on March 10, 1986, tabling it until. April 14, 1986 for final action. On April. 14, 1986, the City Council directed staff to draft a resolution of denial eased on the following findings: a) The extent of the vari,inces requested is excessive for the RR-lB zoning district. b) Given the history of septic system problems in the City of Orono and surrounding Lak( Minnetonka, a density of 3 septic systems un 2.9 acres in a district where 6 acres is required for 3 septic systems, is excessive. c) Because the property is currently used as conforming residential building site, t.ie applicant would not be deprived of a reasonable use of the property. d) Applicant has not demonstrated sufficient hardships to justify granting of the requested variances. At the April 14, 1986 Council mee--ing the applicant noted his attoriiy could not be present at the mee+.ing. The applicant was asked if he wished to have the matter tabled until. his attorney was present. Applicant waived his right to have his attorney present. 16. The applicant maintains t'tat he divided the property in 1958-59 at the request of then Mayor Herb Ross. Because the zoning rode adopted in 1950 allowed on l% one residence per building lot, Mayor Ross would have been legally bound to require that a division be completed in order to al low the new house which was permitted in 1958. 17. The applicant maii,taiis that the property was divided in a manner such that new homes co•ild be built on each of Parcels 2 and 3 according to City codes at the time of division. In fact, Parcel 2 does not and never did -ontain the 1 acre in area required under previous zoning of the p -operty. 18. The applicant has p.ovided soil testing, proposed septic systew, designs, and proposed site plans for each of Parcels 2 and 3 which indicate that technically, septic systems can be provided to serve a residence on each of Parcels 2 and 3, meeting the required sanitary setbacks. However, techn. cal feasibility is not the only criteria considered by the City in reviewing variance applications, and in this case and other similar ca.;es, the City has also considered, as 3 matter of policy, the pot(ntial adverse effect of higher density housing on the quality of Like Minnetonka and the poter.:.ial adverse effect on the general healtt,, safety, and welfare. Paqe 5 of 1) 19. The applicant maintains that when the zoning was proposed to be changed from R-1C (1 acre) to RR-lB ( 2 acre) in .1-974, he attended the public hearings and was told that his lots would still be buildable under the new zoning. This occurrence has not been documented by the applicant nor can it be verified by the City. Whether or not it occurred, the Zoning Cude adopted by the City Council would be binding. Mr. Ferrell. was notified in writing by the City in 1981, upon inquiry, that under the current code, no building permits for a new house would be issued, and that no basis existed for the granting of variances. 20. The 1967 Zoning Code,which designated the property as R-lC, 1 acre, 1.40 foot width, stated as follows regarding existing lots of record: 31.200. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing upon September 14, 1967 (the effective date of the 'oning Code) under single separate ownership in a "R" Residential. District, which does not meet the requirements of the Zoning Code as to area or width may be utilized for a single family detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgment of the Council such use does not adversely affect public health or safety. Single separate owner- ship includes ]oint ownership by not more than two persons. The 1967 Code did not discuss common ownership properties nor did it differentiate between sewered and unsewered lots of record. however, by using the term "Single Separate Ownership", it implied that other types of ownership would be treated differently but did not define in what way. Under this code, the applicant would have been allowed to build on Parcel 3 wi_hout a variance because the lot met the standards of the R.-IC zoninq district. Parcel 2 would have required a lot area variance in order to be legally huildable. 21. The Zoning Code adopted January 1, 1975, which declared the property to be zoned RR-lB, 2 Acre Single Family Residential, stated as follows regarding existing lots of record: 31.201. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing upon January 1, 1975 (the effective date of the Zoning Code) under single separate ownershipin an "R" District, which does not meet the requirements o te Toning Code as to area or width ma} be utilized for a single family detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgment of the Council such use does not adversely affect public health or safety and the following requirements are met: 31.203. In "R' districts of Greater Than One Acre. A lot of record in any "R" District in the City in excess of one acre, which does not meet the requirements of this 'Zoning Code as to area or width only, may be utilized for single family detached dwellingi purposes if the Council finds: paqv 6 of 4 1) it is at least one acre in size, and the average i idth of the lot is at least 100 feet; and 2) it is either served by public sanitary sewer or meets all the septic system requirements of the City or other governmental body; and 3) it otherwise meets the requirements of this or other applicable ordinances;. Under this Code, the Council, at their option, could have granted a lot area variance for a lot of single separate ownership, but the Code again did not specifically discuss any standards for the separation of commonly owned lots. 22. City policy regarding the separation of unsewered, undeveloped substandard, contiguous lots in common ownership was clearly defined by an action of the City Council in 1981, in which the separation of a developed 1.4 acre lot. from thc. adjacent vacant 1.7 acre, 120.3 foot wide vacant lot in the LR.-lA 2-acre, 2.00 foot width, unsewered zone was denied. (Application No. 635, Council. action to deny on October 26, 1981, based on: a) lack of demonstrated hardship; b) no sanitary sewer available; c) insufficient area; d) insufficient width. 23. The 1984 7.oninq Code amendments included the addition of Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (C), ::hich prohibited the "transfer or stile of non -conforming, undeveloped lots not served by public Sanitary sower, aligned in a contiguous arrangement, undivided by a public or pri,ate road or road easement and under same or common ownership" unless specifically approved b�, the City Council, or unless the resulting lots satisfy the area and width requirements of the Zoning Code. No performance standards for approval of such transfers appear in the code. 24. At least 13 properties or groups of properties in a situation similar to Ferrells with a high potential for request of similar variances have been identified within the City of Orono. 25. Since January 1, 1975, when the 2 acre RR-1B zoning district became effective, no permits have been issued for new residences on commonly owned substandard lots in the RR-1B district. Of 153 new residence permits issued in the RR-lR district from 1/l/75 to 5/1/86, 145 permits have been issued for conforming lots, 7 permits have been issued for substandard lots of record in single separate ownership due to the inability of applicants to combine or acquire additional land to create conforming lots, and 1 permit was issued to demolish and rebuild on a substandard single separate ownership lot where a house was already existing. The City of Orono has consistently denied permits for substandard lets owned in common with adjacent developed lots in the RR-1B district. Page 7 of 9 26. The City Council has always -equi.red gnat when two or more unsewered lots are owned in common, each lot must individually meet or excE d the requirements of the Zoning Code before any of the lots can be built u- on and that two or more substandard lots owned in common must be cc^lbined so that the resulting combined lot meets the requirements of the Zoning Code before the lots can be built upon. 27. The granting of such a variance would require amending the many sections of the Comprehensive Plan that govern the rural development of the City. The City of Orono has been consistent in requiring a minimum of two acres for a buildable lot in the rural areas of the City where there is no sewer service. 28. In review of the factual findings noted above, the City finds that to establish a precedent that would allow severely substandard lots to be devel.opEd to be in complete conflict with the established environmental standards for rural development within the City and to be detrimental to the public, health, safety and welfare. The City also looks to the broader, environmental pr'nci.pals and goals setforth in its Community Management Plan and thc• intent of the specific zoning district when dealing with matters related to the public, health, safety and welfare. Issues involving the public health, safety and welfare are not only resolved in securing the obvious traffic and drainage concerns of surrounding property owners but the City also must provide its citizens with a designated and approved optimum level of density, open space and quality of life. 29. The granting of such a variance would require the rezoning of the property to an urban lot size in addition to requiring th extension of City services to the property to maintain a suitable level of fire protection. 30. The granting of such a variance would require the extension of Citi water and sewer to maintain the standards setforth in the Orono Zoning Cod and Comprehensive P.lara for an urban sized lot. 31. In granting such a variance, Council would abandon a longstanding, consistent policy in consideration of the buildability of substandard lots under common ownership and thereby establish an adverse precedent. 32. Denial of the subject variances would not constitute a taking of property or loss of substantial value because Parcels 2 and 3 have always had value and have been used as required area for the residence on Parcel 1. 33. The intent of the application is contrary to the letter and intent of the Orono Comprehensive Plan. page 8 of 9 34. The variances would have an adverse effect upon the health, safety and welfare of the community for th-� reasons outlined herein. 35. The amount of light and air in the neighborhood would be diminished by adding a structure on the substandard lot. 36. The values of surrounding properties will be adversely affected. 37. There are no special conditions applyinq to the land in question which are peculiar to the land or immediately adjoining property. 38. The granting of the application is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial propEr.ty right of the ap-licant. 39. The granting of the variances will serve mainly as a convenience to the applicant, and is not necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. 40. In order to put everyone on notice that the above referenced substandard lots in common ownership must remain under common ownership to maintain the existing house as a conforming use, Council hereby directs the City staff to file such notice against *'�l properties legally described herein. Adopted by the City Council of. the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held May 27, 1986. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hal l in, r-i t y c']r r}:-- %':.:ttv C. Butler, Mayor MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL, MLFTING IiI.LD MAY 12, 1986 ATTENDANCE 7:15 P.M. The Orono Council met on the above date with the following member.- present: Councilmembtz�rs Adams, Grabek, and Frahm. Mayor Butler arrived at 7:27. Councilmember Hammer-1 was absent. the following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Peterson. Also present were City Attorney Blatz and City Engineer Cook. CONSENT AGENDA* It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Grabek, to approve the Consent Agenda* as presented. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember. Grabek, to approve the Minutes of the April 28, 1986 Council meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS There were no comments from the Park Commission at this time. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Planning Comnissioner McDonald was present and had no comments at this time. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were n,) comments from the Public at this time. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: C00 990 W FERRELL* 405..,-W ERTOWN ROAD It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Grabek, to defrr this matter until the May 27, 1986 Council Meeting as requested by the applicant. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 0. #991 & #1018 WILLIAM J. ULRICH 1535 & 1595 BOILN'S POINT ROAD AFTER-TTIE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS William Lil r.i.ch was present for this matter along with his representet ,'Attorney Thomas Humphrey Jr., Attorney Gregory Halbort, Project Coordinator John Noble, I,an.dscF3pe 11,rchi'_cct. Ja^%c-s Rabin, and Surveyor rAar.k Gronbcrq. n ei.*r L3 ZONING FILE N . 990 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 5/2/06 ------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Ward Ferrell COPIES: 3405 Watertown Road Long Lake, MN 55356 ---------------------------------_------------------------------- TYPE OF APPLICATION: XX Variance ----------------------------------------------------------------- COUNCIL ACTION - hOTION: At applicant's request, this item will be continued to the Tuesday, May 27, 1986 Council meeting for formal action. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORO140 COUNCII, MEETING HELD APR? 28, 1986 PUBLIC COMMENTS continued for the sewer assessment that would not have to be paid back. He stated that he had not applied for the grant when it was proposed because it was just delaying the assessment, it was still going to be paid. He felt that the residents should have been notified that there was monies available --o pay the assessments and there was no pay back. He fel-. that more people would have applied for that program. Mayor Butler stated that the money from HUD would have to be used to pay off the assessments or the money would be lost. Councilmember Frahm asked if there was any more money for the program. City Administrator Bernhardson stated there was none. Fie stated that t:ne City staff- was unaware that there would be residents who would qualify for the grant but had not made appl:.cation because of the pay back. There might be funds avEiln:,le from CDBG in February 1987. Mr. Gabriel Jabbour, 780 Tonkawa Road, stated that he has read and heard some remarks regarding the Council's actions that were not favorable. At this time he wished to 1 _�t the Council know that there are residents F-ho feel the Council is doing an excellent job and wished to thank the Council -or their good work and encouraged them t� continue. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: PARIA WARD FERRELL* WATERTOWN ROAD NCE #819 WILLIAM MILLS* 200 LEAF STREET FINAL SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION #1984 Motion by Councilmember Adams, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel to di:-ect staff to write a resolution of denial, this 30luti.on will. be presented to the Council at their May z,, 1986 Council meeting. Ayes 5, Nays 0. Motion by Councilmember Adams, seconded by Councilmember Hammere1, Lo adopt Resolution 01984 approving a final subvidi sion f r William 11i 1 l s. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #998 MAUREEN S. BELWWS* 265 BROWN ROAD SOUTH FINAL SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION #1985 Motion by Councilmember Adams, seconded by Councilmember 11,imme•rel, to adopt Resolution #1985 approving a final. subdivision '(.)r M�Wreen S. [AellowS. Motion, Ayes 5, f APPLICATION NO.4P.Wo CITY Oh ORONO NOTICE OP COUNCIL ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 4/24/86 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ,0: Ward Ferrell COPIES: 3405 Watertown Road Long Lake, MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION: XX Variance -T ---------------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: VOTE: 4 For 1 Against COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: Direct staff to draft a resolution of denial. This resolution will be drafted and presented for final council action at the May 12, 1986 Council Meeting. If you desire certified copir-3 of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder or City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. INUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING FIELD APRIL 14, 1986 i '1990 ARD FERRELL 340 WATERTOWN ROAD tIANCE - SECOND RL'VIE1 Acting City Administrator Gerhardson explained the request for a lot width and lot area variance for two rural properties on Watertown Road noting this was previously reviewed by Council on March 10, 1986 which at that time was tabled because the entire Council was not present to review it. :-Yard Ferrell was present for this matter and stated his attorney unaware of this meeting and was unable to attend due to a prey appointment. Mayor Butler asked Mr. Ferrell if he wished to defer this i� att(!r until the next Council meeting in order for his at r.rney to be present. Mayor Butler intUrmed him that if this application is denied, he must wait six months to reapply. Mr. Ferrell stated that he would like to proceed with his application and depending on the outcome will consult with his attorney. Fe noted that he still feels that he is entitle) to build a house and sell one lot to help pay for his retirement home as long as he has owned the land since 1948. Ferrell stated he divided it because the Council. asked him to in 1958, and the Council accepted the four lots and that the present Council has a moral obligation to honor what that Council told him. Zoning Administrator Gaffron updated Councilmerbers Grdbek and Hammerel (who were absent at the March loth meeting) that Mr. Ferrell was requesting permission for 3 homes on a total of 2.9 acres in a two -acre zone. The 3 lots are commonly owned by Mr. Ferrell and consist of 1.C1 acres (upon which Mr. Ferrell's present home is located), 1.04 acres, and .85 acres espectively. 'ie noted that applicant has submitted soil testing and sit - plans to indicate that both septic systems and houscb can be placed on each lot. He note,a that the question is whether 'his would set a precedent by granting approval. Mr. Farrell noted that the "28 similar case" parc,!ls noted in staff's memo are less than two acres with the exception of one and that none of these parcels have been owned as long as he has owned his property. Mr. Ferrell stated that he had planned to build a retirement home on one lot and sell the other lot for payment for the house and retirement equity. He feels that the fioancial hardship should be considered. MINUTES OF TILL REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 14, 1986 #990 WARD FERRELL continued Mayor Butler stated that the Council has to consider the legalities involved with future requests if they were to approve his application. Counci: :r Adams noted tha'-. aven by allowing one home to he t would require variance of the 2 acre minimum lot requirement. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that the zoning code has changed during the time that Ferrell has owned the property, however the code did not specifically address "commonly owned" lots until 1984. City Attorney Blatz stated that it was the Council's duty to enforce the code as it stands today and that comments made by previous councilmembers are not legally binding. Councilmember Grabek noted that (per memo) within a 1/2 mile radius of the applicants property, there were 37 houses with less than 2 acres and 39 with 2 acres or more. He stated that part of the common ownership ratio. -,ale was "how do these lots fit in the surrounding area"? !;e questioned if Ferrell's lots would support septic systems. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that the lots would support septic systems under limited development i.e. no tennis court, pool, etc. Councilmember Grabek asked City Atto--ney Blatz the legal ramifications involved if this were approved. Attorney Blatz stated that there is a potential problem which the Counci 1 should reveiw. As far as granting a variance, Council must find an undue hardship to Mr. Ferrell. She noted that in 1981 .i similar request war denied because applicant did not demonstrate a hardship, no sanitary sewer was available and insufficient area and width. She stated that i� her opinion that if Council cannot differentiate M: !:cell's property from others, that by granting the t`quest in effect they would be changing the ordinance. Councilmember Grabek questioned whether there would be legal justification to approve this ap,ilication without changing the ordinance based on 1) a house can be built on Bach lot safely with septic system 2) it is cons.stent with the neighborhood size lots 3) applicant has )e n a citizen of Orono since 1936. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AFRIL 14, 1986 #990 WARD FERRELL continued Attorney Blatz stated that it is a policy decision Council must decide upon and that the undue hardship finding must be spelled out in the resolution to support the variance approval. Councilmember Grabek stated that it seemed to be the "just" thing to do to grant this variance and he felt it would not be making that much of an exception for other cases that may come up. Mayor Butler stated that this was a dilemma due to the unique circumstances however, she felt realistically she would have to recommend denial because, in her view, it would completely change the zoning policy. She expressed her fear in having to plant another sewer system. Councilmember_ Frahm stated that he has problems %.,ith the "common ownership" issue and whether there is a difference between sewered areas vs. non-sewered areas. He noted that if this request were approved the ordinance should be changed and be more clearly defined. Councilmember Grabek stated that he felt the direction of the charige made in 1974 was to be able to provide a reviewal on an individual basis. Planning Commission member Be) lows stated that one way to differentiate between common ownership vs. separate o,nership, in separate ownership the hardship would be not allowing them to use thei- property, whereas, in Mr. Ferree.l's case he is able to live on his property and use it. She also noted that the only hardship in Mr. Ferrrell's case is financial which cannot be considered as a valid hardship. Mayor Butler noted that she would be open to allowing one additional home but not two. Councilmember Hammerel stated that this is a hard decision but he felt two houses in an area where there is not enough area for one house without a variance is an excess, especially in an unsewered zone. Councilmember Adams stated that he felt sympathetic in Mr. Ferrel l's case but he felt 1 acre lots in an unsewered area is undesirable. Councilmember Grabek questioned whether there would be a problem because Mr. Ferrell's attorney was not notified. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING FIELD APRIL 14, 1996 #990 WARD FERRELL continued Attorney Blatz stated that she felt Mr. Ferrell made a knowledgable waiver of attorney and was made aware that he could have delayed the matter in order to have his attorney present. Councilmember Grabek questioned if approval of this request would significantly impact the non-sewered area. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that in his opinion, it would not have a significant impact in that particular area. Mayor Butler stated that taking into consideration that the request is for development of three residential units on 2.9 acres in a 2-acre zone; it was moved by Mayor Butler, seconded by Councilmember Adams, to direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial based on the following: At this point, Mayor Butler again stated that she felt it fair to inform Mr. Ferrell, that before an actual vote and decision is made, he has the option to request tabling of his application in order for his attorney to be present. Mr. Ferrell's response was that he did not think it would make any difference because the Council has already made up their minds. 1) Extent of variances. 2) Known fallibility of septic systems on small lots. 3) Denial does not deprive owner's rights to reasonable use as residential property as it stands now. 4) No hardship to the land justifying request. 5) Zoning code demands 2 acres of dry buildable property per parcel wherein this parcel. is 2.9 acres overall requesting 3 buildable lots. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays I. Councilmember Grabe' vcted nay. # 1007 CAROI, TRAPP* 4701 WEST BRANCH ROAD PQELIMINIARY SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION #1979 for t:his matter. It. was moved by Counci_ Imc,mber Frahm, secor ded by Counci liveriber llammcre l , to adopt Resoluti-,n 01979 grantlnq Frol lminary for a plat at 4701 test I;ranch Pnad P ye-, 4, Nay,, 0. To: Council Members From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assitant Zoning Administrator Date: March 14, 1986 Subject: #990 Ward Ferrell - 3405 Watertown - Variance - Additional Information Note: Please refer to your memo from the March 10 meeting. List of Exhibits A - 1974 Public Hearing Minutes - Rezoning B - Similarly situated properties - A-M (map) C - Sketches I. Re: Ferrell comment that at time of rezoning, City stated that existing Tots would still be buildable The attached copy of the 1974 rezoning public hearing minutes contains the only reference I could find regarding the status of existing lots (p.2.). II. Documentation of Similar Cases in the Rural Zone. I have again reviewed the "28 similar cases" referred to in the previous memo, in which substandard lots of record are commonly owned but separate for tax purposes. Actually, this second review uncovered a total of at least 30 such situations, of which I will document here the dozen or so which have a high potential for a future variance request: A) 320 Woodhill Road - 2 parcels: w/house-3.5 acre; vacant-1.1 acre; vacant lot fronts on Edgewood Hills Road. B) 105 Cygnet Place - 2 parcels: w/house-1.0 acre; vacant-1.0 acre. C) 3865 Bayside Road - 2 parcels: w/house-0.7 acre; vacar_t-1.2 acre. D) 341 West Lake Street - 3 parcels: w/house-0.5 acre: vacant- 0.5 acre; vacant-0.5 acre. E) Lakeview Golf Course - 4 parcels: Golf Course-125 acres; vacant-1.98 acres; vacant-1.98 acres; vacant-0.75 acres(only parcel with road frontage). F) 1080/1090 Heritage bane - 3-plus parcels: w/house-7.0 acres(estate); vacant-1.0 acres; vacart-1.0 acres. G) 1425 Bayridqe Road - 2 parcels: w/house-1.0 acre; vacant-1.1 acre. H) 1900 Shoreline I)rivL - ' parcels: w/house-1.4 acre; vacant.- 1.7 acre. File #990 Page 2 of 2 I) 300 Sixth Ave. N.- 2-plus parcels: w/house-100 ac.+; vacant- 1..5 acr(--,. J) 879 North Brown Road - 2 parcels: w/house-1.0 acre; vacant- 2.6 acres. K) 960 N. Wi.l low Drive - 2 parcels: w/house-1.0 acre; vacant- 1.0 acre. L) 320 Turnham Road - 2 parcels: w/house-1.7 acres; vacant-1.1 acres. M) 200 Bederwood Road - 4 parcels: w/house-0.9 acre; vacant - 0.6 acre; vacant - 1.1 acre; vacant - 1.0 acre. These 13 cases can be broken down into a number of categories: 1. Total acreage of commonly -owned parcels is great enough to yield conforming lots if lot lines are re -arranged: A,E,F,I. 2. Total acreage of commonly-o�,ned parcels yields only enough area for a single substandard lot with existing house: C,D,L. 3. Total. acreage of commonly -owned parcels yields enough area for a single conforming lot with house, but not enough add.;tional area for a second conforming lot: '_',,G,H,J,K,M (these are very similar to Ferrell situation). III. To help Council assess the impact of granting or denying the Ferrell variances, consider the following figures: - Number of existinr; developed lots in the un-ewered residential zones: 1,050 approximately - Number of undeveloped, substandard sized lots, in single separate ownership in unsewered zones: 15 identified - Number of unsewered common ownership situations with a realistic potential for requesting variances to lot area in order to gain an additional building site: 22 identified (13 of these shown as A-M attached) - within a 1/2 mile radius of the Ferrell properties (excluding the 3 Stubbs Bay Study Area streets Tonka Avenue, Crestview Avenue, Eastlake Street where sewer is contemplated) the existing developed lot sizes are: 2.0 acre or larger - 39 1.25 acre to 1.99 acre - 13 .75 acre to 1.24 acre - 23 Less than .75 acre - 11 C IT Y OF ORONO Spocial i4vetlr.g of the Planning ConnIssion, March 13, 1974 Members prosent: Chairman Brad VanNest, Fred Curtis, Charles Kallestad, Val Elliott, John Guthrie, Ronald Kullberg, Paul Pesok. i4embers absent: ;,largo Gasch. Chairman VanNost oponed the Public Hearing at 7:45 P.H. for consldaratlon of zoning arrondmonts involving ch3ngos in dis- trict boundarios and district classifications within the City. 'The Zoning Administrator presented the iJotice of Public Haar- incg, the Affidavit of Publication, and the Certificate of 'calling to affected property owners. Chairman VanNest Introduced Mayor Robert Searles. Havor Searles welcomod the peoplo present and explained what would be taking place at the mooting and thanked the citizens for thulr participati-n and Input in the rezoning. Chairman VanNest explained tho maps; the zoning districts; ih3 pormittod, conditional, and accessory uses, and other roquircmonts In tho various zoning districts. `-, The followirij parsons appuarod and were given an opportunity to be heard: CO:-iAEHT: Rogsrding the 5-acre zone: Are there prohibitions against feeder lot? 1;0.should consider taking them out of our codes. Tho Watorchcd Oistrlc+ 6 P.C.A. havo made many studies on this matter. Envlrori.i7ontal pollution doos coma from stock farms. We must have Incraesing control In the future. Ttiw-o are specific requirements In tho codo right now for II-vc tcck farm,. A p rson must have 10 acres or more and re- colve- o conditlonal uwo permit from tho City. Do you havo restrictions of the number of animals, etc.? kctody can tako an existing stock farm and increase the stock cr expand the oporatlon. There are limitations on pas•uring and keeping of horses. 7:45 NAME: Bill McKnight Chairman VanNest +layor Searles Chairman VanNest BI I I McKnight Mayor Searles 1 %e felt It neeossary to provic:e for hobby farms. It Is a teg- Chairman VanNest Itlrrite use of the land. The area doslgnoted on ro ps as 5 acres Is principally being usod as hobby farms today. People should be able to buy 2 acres without sower for the Dill McKnight y same moony they would spend on one acre with sewer. Whai about people in the 5 acre zone that have lots with loss than 5 acres? The code provides for non -conforming use. If the property Chairman VanNe, was platted prior to code, the City will continue to allow the sites for building lots. I have 20 acres, 70 acres, 10 acres, 3 acres, 5 acres, and Loren Butterfield two residents on 15 acres. The new zoning fits the area nicely. A number of other residents to the 'v:est are on largor tracts. We are in favor of the 5 acre zone. 1,!hy nro you showing Highway 12 where you are? Vary Carol Tho Planning Commission was trying to avoiJ dividing the City Chairman VanNest by a freeway. A study map from the Highway Department was shown indicatir,g ;-13yor• Searles 4 alternatives that they have consider^d in the past. Why h-ive you shown 2 acre lots on land close to the industrial rlylow Schmit area? i1hy is it not used for more dense development? �"ihe Planning Commission was not able to iron out and nail Chairman Van;4ost � down all the problems. The map shows a plan study area around the industrial areas. Plans for Highway 12 are 20 to 25 years away and is beyond Mayor Searles cur control. This is a prcroquisite for dcternininq proper land uses. Wo also cannot have more dense land use unlesz the prop©rtr is severed. We can't avoid fact: like pipe and road capacity before making a decision regarding the compre- hensive pion. In 1975, the 1•totro interceptor should be con- nected. It will pick up long Lako and Orono Extended sewer lines ►vill allow a more dense land use. I have 20 acres that connocts to nld Crystal Bay Road. Why "ary Carol are you making It a 5 acre zone when It could he put into I acre lots now? i1b y are you talking about 5 acre zoning with Highway 12 coming through? Highway 12 Is at least 20 yoors away. If we l eavo I acre ton- Chn i rr in JanNe.;t ing and dovolopmjnt takes place, the c;o nsity will force sewer end an endless chain of urban reletod expenses. 39 hav the best drainage In the area. Mary Carol (hero Is no sewer available thero. Chairmen Var.1116;t ' Sewer will be available to connect to some day. Aary Carol 'his Is a decision we'll have to make. It would cost 5 112 ChnIrnan VanNest to 6 million dollars for trunk line to service that area. The nubllc hearings Indicated a1Rr)st -,P"ninous dlsaparoval of the �,uwer project. I,hy is my property zoned for 5 acre lots while 2 acre zoning Mary Carol is considered across the street? Jo you want it brought back to 2 acres? Chairmen VanNest A Public Hearing is not to present concrete facts and d©cis- Mayor Searles ions. What you do and say has an influence on what happens. ,.Iould you sggost the entire piece be zoned for 2 acres? Chairman VanMest To Stubbs Oay Road. Mary Carol Did you use the Soil Conservation Service information to de- Evert Ties tormino what soil: would support on -site systems? Intentions are: Alot of areas in Orc,nL connot have the sewor Chairman VanNest system. Everyone is telling us the same thing. Homes on 1/2 acre lots are too small for septic systems and private wells. .le should draft a stiff ordinance to specify what type of soptic system should be constructed, and make the party shoo. 11wo sites for tho septet syste!n. ire want to fund the staff t,.) inspect annually the septic systems, and if It Is not working properly, make them fix it, or we'll fix it Er,d assess them. 'Ho must know that septic system won't work before we s id r,ionuy to put sewer in. 0 �✓ 5-mere zoning seems restrictive and a means for keeping most Evert Ties people ouF of Orono. it is not our intention at all to keep people out of Orono. :Mayer Searles Orono is a good sized area. it's a "cookie -cutter" area. We think diversity is good. Orono is big enough to accommodate all types. Other bodies such as the 'letro Council are con- -ornod a I .O. it appears looking at the trap that 00;3 of land is 2 or 5 acres, Fred Polsson Nth I acre development, 10% (f the !and is hardcovered, that should not create a storn water problem. ilhat sort of economic i!.;pact will this plan have on the community? 5-acre zoning was not dosignod to alovlato the septic pr;)blom, but rather to allow a particular typo of land use. It seorned ,ecor,!3nry to have 2 acres. -Is went to protect Lake 'finnetonka. llhy aren't we going to ,i%jver it*( Jhy are you allowing development at all if there Is out stnior ava I I ab l e 7 ) z,ii Pnow Tonkawa Road, North Arm, tlorth Shore Drive, and Hack- tet,y or%, Jf',.01 That arr currently being considered for sewer. The stream entering Stubbs Bay tia•, to be polluting Lake 'flnn- © 9TOnicl. How are we going to handle it? ,lo, .Ic don't know that. We are having It chnckod out. wo kiint tj Soe If It is foaslblo to sower this aroa, ,Ind If so, j .,i I I dr It. Chairman VaniJest rred Polsson Msyor Searles Fred P-ji sson Alayor ;ear l es The problem is nockotq of development. Wo have got to find Chairman Vanllost alternate ways of solving the problem rather than expand sow- ers. .►hat sort of economic imp-ict will -ihe rezoning ha.e on the Fred Poisson homeowner? It is spocjiativo to predict futuro land values. In some '4ayor Searles situations, tho value could increase, but in rM cases, it would undoubtedly diminish. In eeading the letter sent out, I was under the impression Dick Putnam, that a Comprohonsivo Plan of Orono would be discussed. Ap-- parontly, this meeting is to discuss a modification of the zoning ordinance wirhout a Comprehensivo Plan. Why are you coming Ir with zoning ordinances when you don't have the) Ccmrprehonsivc rIan? You are putting the cart b�foro the horse. It is g^iod to be using tho Metropolitan Counci I. as a guide, but you haven't con idered such things as housing. Low or moderate housing has not been considered and many may find themselves not being ably to afford to live here. Orono i s a loader in fighting to keep Lake id i nnetoWo clean, end got wo see that I acro lots wi h sewer on the lake does not nocos3arlly arrest tho pollution problem. Funding annual Inspectors for septic systems seems to be a poor use of doi- } lors that could be put to use elsewhere. �..� Teo riony issues haven't been solved. Sono of the decisions Chairman VanNost are in the planning study areas. to realize many decisions hive to be made. Orono isn't Ignoring housing policies. Wo have approached Aayor Searles the :lotropolltan Council on how a housing policy can be ap- plied to Urono. John Guthrie is putting full effort into studyir-ci hcw policies would apply to Orono. The City has discussed tax credit for refurbishing older structures. 1'lo villl have a workable plan on.housing policies. .lhoro is the C msultant's report? Do they concur with the Comprehensive Ilan? Brauer's plan has boon Incorporated Into the Planning Corrr+l s- lon;; recorrr-endatlon. I agroe that wo are putting the cart baforo the horse. are exploring sewer proposals before we complete the Compre- hensive Plan. There has boon a rush of events and we cannot continua when elements of the Comprehensive Plan are undecided. was worrlod :.bout the C xnprohens'.ve Plan so I went to the ,Metropolitan Council Cnd saw the people who would review the Plan. I asked If we should hold this Public Nearing and would they advi6o us to handle it as the Planning Commission saw tit. Todd Fruen Cha I rrian VanNest Mayor Searles I looked at a Comprehensive Plan as baing a glossy covered book. Chairman VanNest Do 1 ng practical, it Is e boMc that's novor f i n l shod; a ,ever- nrlin(J rr(it ri-,s; IMplementntIon of th_,ughts, otc. You are upgrading sorro land and downgrading othors. How can you down -zone? I question you right! ,you have taken an overall view of the entire City and did this as part of an overall plan. What you are talking about is taking use away from the land. We are not doing It capriciously or arbitrarily. This would re illegal. 14a are keeping the public issue In mind. As legal Counsel for Mr. Ndeslund, Cheyenne Land Company, I .would like to submit my objection to the 2 acre zoning to the property involved in their petition and will submit our grounds for objection in a letter. Vf'hy are you going all the way to the tracks with the sower on Nlorth WI I I ow Or i vo? Bernard Klugman Chairman VanNes-, Mayor Searle Walter Grass Don M i dd l eston So or is being designed as a trunk lino to handle that area. Chairman VanNest It Is dosignod in agr©s✓mont with Long Lake. Are you intores- ted In having the 1/2 zone around Hackberry zoned differonti•y? I am on County Rood 6. 1 an, uneosy about having the size of Hll',% Hollander the lots raisod. They are also being revalued now. The property tripled in value last year. How defirite are the rcgulotions? Will we be paying for trunk line? With this zoning, the cost of property in Orono will he prohibitive. C_) Thoro is no chonna proposed for your area. Leaving it zoned Chairman VanNest the current 2 mores is what's proposed. The reason for cores and 5 acres Is to prevent the need to assess the trunk to the landowners. Wo are aleviating the need for people to soil their property to pay off a sewer assessment. 1 fool the lack of a Comprehensive Plzn is bad. Bill Martin would INka to stress that tho Comprohm.lve Plan will be Chairman VanNost compIotod. Property on 51 adjacent to Maxwoil Bay: The property Is being Larry Fork rranc_d to 1/2 acre residential. i have owned this property for 22 years. In I966, Orono atteoptod a similar rezoning as is boing prcpa^,cd nord. I wont to court. The battle and ex - were great. The court said the City action was ardlt- rory, and It was zonod back to what it was. Orono will *ak- cfn to court again for arbitrary action and tho decislan the court would to the samo. Thoro Is an excessive amount of E3-2 in the Maxwell area. The Chairman VanNest LK,CU has done research in the area and statistics have been compiled. Stat'stics have proven that Maxwell Bay Is one of thu worst bays f.r boot storago. In line with overall phllos- cphy for protecting Lake Minnetonka, I do not feel we are being Ocapricious or arbitrary b/ attacking the probloms as we are. I hope you are tlneoro. you have cut dcr ks from 3001 to 200'. Larry Fork It Is all taken In to restrict the use of thu lake. Why should this one mirIna ba poneIIz-A? Why was the sank marine singled 1 #t It's an eM9Gt rnpll,_I If d rvgrs aer. -S- I began work on this proposed zoning before I ever know Chairman Va.—t,ost about the 1966 Incidont. I want it on record that pumative damages will be sought Larry Hark against each member at the Planning Commission and Council and anyone else involved in formulating tho new zoning ord- inance. Poop!e of 0-2 area have a letter of protest to the City. It Stan Straley is signed by all the people in the area. I invosted money In it for one purpose: Because it is zoned Lake Commercial. ('paid a considerable amount of money for the property. Under the present proposed zoning, you will allow only 4 units to be built on the proporty. Throe to four per acre. A total of 6 for the total piece. Chairman Vant4est I couldn't build and soil residential units sl7ting next to Stan Straley two, marinas. Property here will lay and deteriorate to nothing. Whore did you get the information on Maxwell Bay? From the. U•CP, substantial surveys from Hennepin �i w' iy��• "'-'f~1�`�-"'J•'�•• _��_, �,w4t I talked with Hennepin County and they said MaxwelI Bay is Stan Straley ono of three least used bays on the Lake. ;'his is an effart to got array from commercial zoning by devi moans. Ycur �-� argurronts are being shot full of holds. I w�ll back Hark to the full extent. I am speaking for the Lake Ol metonka Improvement Association. George Johnson I am in support of the total zoning chan-a proposal. The group supports the zoning propo�il and opposes the rostaur- ant on Maxwell Ba". Casco Poin, a mother znu a resident, I looked at the property inv.,, I would not consider liviric_i there, and it should ri,maln ^.iUI. This arGi is not a nlcu lhbcrhood, and it is too late for this type of proposal. Tho traffic on the E3ay is high, 7619 Planning Comm;s_.ion's pr000-.j1 Is groat. You are not solving the problem by rezoning It to rosidentiel hocj use the Marina will still exist. Is it possible to allow a restaurant and not rezoio the land? The fear is that the Marinas will expand into the area that Is prosently ocrupicd by the homeS, F•trs. Charles Davis Don Stoffer Herman Renner Dick Karl Brad VanNest OIf Vie property is rezoned, the value will be less than the 04r. GratwaII original cost 'v Mr. Straley. If we weigh the public interest agaln3t the cost to Mr. Straley, it seems like the rezoning is not Justlflod. the pr4rVurfy aloe-) Navarre Lang is shGan eg—eildontial prop- 'Ar. Block arty. Why? 1 am in objortIn, •7 th' n►• (NY 11 This used to be the access to Jackson Corners. Since it no Chairman VanNest longer servos this function, and there is an excessive amount of corm7rcial property in Navarre area, it was docidod that this property should be rezoned to a residential land use. If our property wis rezoned, it mould result in a loss of approxir,�ately 60M to 70% of tho land value. We could con- struct twelve 112 acre lots; 6 of which would be along the railroad tracks. The D-4 zone on the south side of Co. Rd. 15 should extend all the way to Carman Avenue. Will the property cost of the school complex be part of tho study area? Also, the property along Highway 12 should be mapped as n sowerod area. Although this is not ind1catod on the rrop, this wi I I be a study area. VIIII the Council corrponsato those whose land will be back- zonod? Will -;-he taxes chang j s 1 scrm3 property is no longer In a cc::...�,irc l a l zoro? A i sc, I would like to question the need for all the property that is shown zoned for office space. It Llso sor-ma unfair that all people should have to adhere ti to the 751 atback reo;rrcnent from the lake. J} Tonka Corporation Ed Laymen Bill Gonyoa Chairman Vantlost GEry Nelson Mr. Evhurst 0-4 (Offi(_ 4Ir,+►I-r) is a commor land use. do have detorm- Chairman VanNost Ined tha+ t.ro present commercial lrrl,' in Navarre was exces- sive►, avd, therefore, a B-d class •ion is not unreason- able. Also, variances mill be qr_: to the 75' Iako;hore s°-atbeck r ilromont. w,,,, ` iko to go on record as being In favor of the proposcu John Erdahi zoning change for tiro *heater property in Navarro. The Navarro and Commerce Association did support the Cliff 6jork contention that there was excessive commercial proporty In he Navar,-o area. The report, however, contondod that land should bo rcclassifiod tots land use of ,qual economic valuo. Five wo i nvest i Jated the possibility of bringing In moro i ndu_- n-v i d 6yo trial uses? i;;ro ;,idustry would Increase fh,_` tax biaso. Tho Planning Commisslr r has considered Including more Indust- Cheirrhen VanNest trial property in tt Comprohonslvo Pion. Expansion of Indus- try to the went, he _ecr, eight not be compatible wlth the school to the port yo nc,J more t du:;►, n Orono bocauso Industry provides jr,bs. Mr. 1 •19 Industry brings In r� r pooplo who nood more schools. road,, Bill _KAI. rind parks. 14dny people are goIrJ oIsewh^re to work when they ccuId bo Tonka Corpor -ion l,rovIdod with cmglc,.: nt ►Ight horn 1n tho cotrmunIty. -7- I would lika to go on rocord as being opposed to tho B-4 Ger)rge Piper zone on the north side of Highway 15. t•I i I I thero be anothor public hearing? Si.1-1- AcKn i ght Only if changes are mado which aro more restrictivo than prc- Chairman . sontod tonight. Perhaps proporty ownors should be componsat- od for property losses that result from tho rezoning. .,.1v%c.l ' a ` r -ipvr, ;j ; :one of the proporty own- Rona I d Ku I 1 burg tors. If this is not done, we will undouLtodly create areas of residential blight. Is thorn a procodont for componsating owners in situations Paul Posek such as this? Aftor all poopie had boon affordod an opportunity to be hoard, Chairman Vand3st closed the Public Hea�in3 eti 11:30 P.A. Posek roved, KuIIborg seconded that the meet'ng be , Ijourne6 at 11:32 F.H. Ayes (6), days (0). M -mow 4P,tYn A AAfln P"1 4!1(N1 I'� �o , � I ,. •NNNE'BAC A``• . 1 �•i=1• ecei.ro I � •� � �r i 1 ' •/' `BAY i •�•` .�. �'�• i ' inn e— 9c�nn r- Ann '>nno -32_0 4(4.1 4- .q -0 au31. 3R.R.L.NO 109 B rJr ,15 4 if R.L.S. NO. 1098 c E got) ,1Z Esj z2 S GY(,ti&"r Pt.Ac c- 1 ., ' .tint _ ;3 s �zz �+ -5,f9' :a; ' WA t E RTOWN R OLot I r 4ez oo rj4.?4 ! D --- - — . O v, h cb M 2 ti s O ,y rn j1 e� f o 77� 2 t 44 : J.l_ 6-2- J~ ^ W, � Lot a -- o S.9 Z ^ Lot 3 Lot 6 A R, h ' • 6 i gl PARK I ° tV 1. o' •� G s (� 10 510ov 41) COe' 4 N `+ Lot w LJ CYGNET.,•. „ PL y M .1111 10 t rr ■ U915414' 4'. _YSY'!sar 1 '• ' w 'C 144 1 3 10 �s 56 58 55 j p -. �/► 63�`b)..�� rn -_NO. 84 Z ,r. 1 . tia —�= - A r t U 211_. <Lc (?y11�I4•C. `�' 4— -- - S . ; T U 8 so. S Ac (15) V'i4c 5 (Izl 86 O-S AG 3 <,9 Park (,3) B, Z•.a 5;477 7 ' / (14) 78 ;�[l� 50:00 l164'Sa'60 10 16 L ..fin' v 15hl) 30 G A;tar 12 - 445 )4U4�N 13 - '-- -t4 "69.55 Res. �` Cn V , i 1f S;V, !;( Z�;- 5 w 114 12S ( 3) ((--sO L F Co q4e S: � 3o0L.1 to Pc 34. f sJAREsrm NV44.9 \ °�_K 6, MTKA �pl M_- A:_EY Vp (9i23 ` Jam: 56RX 04 NK Ci ILI ., ;e 4-a � � ti r• men ° s .+�5 � �.. � `_ '� /\��% l Yr7 , 4.� l�L�` o tilr•f PZit'K " ? N ! W �� / ' )� ? ' ` may` • ` i r A R': -list I �. • A ` d gyp- 'r.� `'� ay r a-Z4'2'06• °r i iC771 ^,fe�b'yOELl�, iy titi� A:11'16'0l 2 HERITAGE (20 f/• A • / � III. ! "—„ ., _i ..-. '-` - _. _._ \ _. _ `i 1'/'1 �J �"�,��. _ a ..�,/ •� � —_ y _ wE_ -- J inf 1 14rwirw Asp y I 1/ 1 i f,• •. � %gin , fij � ?�, C`J'•r ,�.�� oy Q "� ro / y Sti. h o M�QI• '{' - , 1 , �\` �` Ff 11 ,1 / t 'w 4ti �` '9 SI/ol' � ; p/ r•. � ^� • 'c�ii p a`�i s S� ' t f 3 uj y cr /` I o lo �/ /( I L1 ,�) ti of S I `9 ^_ x e v� 8by o, -o£j' �/6 0A , e DIV EU c4 R F S aHl �050 '.Sg.{ U013 Is a c F�7, tn y' T-zr it i I 0 1 Uri t(� CO vtiti1� \ . l 1 v r V ti �) d icsM, ♦ /// Fn • a �o d Z 6^ ' k �. /^ �• �� •,fief/ ��Y � c, ��:j.. ..•+ __ _• _ ...--�' �n ; ' `ter, M - .• �� �'� Q\' ,,;� � �o tic J of,/ r �` dr!p in f Fi y jobw. F'Il o �!".�1 �• N r . Jl .� 'a••. ti ova ,♦ � an �' .ri � �� t �a•��t +� 81� •bp ,r. M tt),I N . �'i , c _/ -� a , M �, tdY. .rti ��^,. �- Oj C` •; - N rr� M ,�ia�i lam\ J 6vn f N 'it c, Sill ZP 01 3 Q N Ld C f '% a N F� n 3•: 1 v� wa1�„ t. 7070 r7 7065 V0 5zOri 705G 3500 (41 00 s«le -�e et 4 P.) 555 V, f 44703 40 cq f%u PE :9 14901 1490i .. I - .7 59210 ------- :70' 3 , �O ;, 2i )-.52 ova (I pp CHIPPEWA F-SECON 3 a D+ D IA ADD. -, *901 4e. 2s -,Jq 59io Z700 A WUST ftf -L--- . . ................... ... ... .. (1036 Ds 512) 0 e 0. 1 - 20 m co cn —49 lei /0 44 41 1 ILEEM 4S"C 4% 74 S1 ks &Aq �4-- (4406) FIST` 33 x 4 Nf p'C' 35 (10.3 It. 32 K 3 I -A 0 I)v 235.73 40 28 6103 14 N. UJ of 124 )Ap' 23 20 IZI)6 do/ 6 4:79 r. 2,10 !w - i(It - f;'? ZONIWG FILE NO. #990 CITY OF ORONO NOTJCE OF COUNCIL ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 4i3-7357 Z,te of Notice: 3/11/R6 TO: Ward Ferrell COPIES TO: 3405 Watertown Road Long Lake, MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION; XX Variance ------------------------------------------------------ DATE OF MEETING: 3/10/86 VOTE: 3 For 0 Against COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: Voted 3-0 to table until April 14, 1986 Council meeting when it is anticipated that all 5 Councilmembers will be present. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder or City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HPAJ) MARCH 10, 1986 1967 & #968 IDSTROM continued Assistant Zoning Administrator noted that the driveway has been reviewed by staff and finds no problem with the access location. I'e also noted the potential of a future third lot which would create problems for the applicant. Mayor Butler stated that the resolution should note the potential problems regarding future re -subdivision which would require the relocation of the access to properties off the private street. Mr. Idstrom stated he was not concerned with a third lot at this time and would deal with the, problem in the future if it arose. Councilmember Adams stated he found no problem with the proposed subdivision of two lots only but would if there were three. It was moved by Councilmember Adams, seconded by Ccuncilmember Franm, directing staff to draft a resolution with the appropriate variance relating to the frontage and specifying that this is approval of two lots noting the future problems of a third lot, to be presented before final approval at the March 24, 1986 Ccunci 1 meeting. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 0. S,>3411, RD FERRELL 3415 WATERTOWN ROAD VARIANCE Ward Ferrell was present for this matter along with his attorney, Leroy Haglund. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a variances on two existing lots, which are in the 2 acre zone and are substandard under the current code. He Stated that this was presented last May as a zoning ap,,ea 1. He noted that applicant has had septic site testing done and has proposel acceptaLle primary and alternate sites. Mr. Haglund stated that applicant's dream was to build a house on one of these lots and was platted as such many years ago. He submitted a petition signed by the neighbors stating they have no objections to this proposal. He also submitted aerial photos to show that the applicant's proposal would not be inconsistent with the area. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL. MEETING HELD MARCH 10, 1-986 f990 FERRELL continued Mayor Butler explained the problems that are involved in this application and that the reason this area was rezoned in 1974 to 2 acre lots was the problem with septic system overcrowding and failure on 1 acre lots. She noted that other similar applications have been denied for this same reason and Council would be setting a precedent by approving this. Mr. Haglund stated that this situation is que and that properly installed septic systems do not =ail. Councilmember Adams stated that problems are showing up with septic systems in 1 acre areas. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron reviewed the history of the zoning code from 1950 to present. He noted the similar request by Alden Anderson in 1981 which set a precedent for denial in these cases. Mr. Haglund stated there there is no proof of setting a precedent by approving this because of the unique situation. Mr. Ferrell stated that the present zoning code would prevent subd_ vision requests of 2 acre parcels, but he has already subdivided his property, upon the request of the City. Maycr Butler stated that she felt the entire Council should be present to make a decision on this application. Mr. Ferrell stated that the Council has a moral obligation to honor previous councils' actions. It was moved by Mayor 12utler, seconded by Councilmember Adams, to table this application until the April 14, 1986 Council meeting for the presence of the entire Council.. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 0. #.1006 CHRIS S DALE PALM 1710 SHADYWOOD ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION 01936 'ity Adrnin i str t cr RF rnh} irdson expl aired the request for t ardcovi. r •.7ari.ances to conFstruct_ a home addition and attache(', oliarage. The pr(?posed hardcovers increases are frorr 17.1:Q to 18.2'# in the 0-75' zone; the proposal stlot':s a ut, ,'rnCSSr freiv ;..- to 26.8% in th' 75-250' zone, L1:t ui7 for saf-ty rE,asons, a itac::-up -j rc In S(f1U:J .I CI fr:- ! rlc'1uc.ied, So the propo`_f,d hardcuvc:r ht t() TO: Orono City Council Members Exh. /V FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator 60000ND _;-Iq._�,'7 DATE: March 3, 1986 SUBJ: #990 Ward Ferrell, 3405-3411-3415 Watertown Road - Variances List of Exhibits: A - Applications for variances on 2 vacant lots B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Notice to Applicant 2/20/86 E - Composite Site Plan c F - Survey, Soils Report, Site Plan i :_sting house, east lot G - Survey, Soils Report, Site Plan t-en-er lot _ 9_- Survey, Soils Report, Site Plan fo,. west lot I - Staff memos 11/13,*95, 2/6/86 J - Minutes: Planning Commission 4/15/85; Council 5/28/85; Planning Commission 11/18/85; Planning Commission 2/18/86 K - Tax History, 1974 - 1985 L - Council Minutes September 22, 1958 M - Pertinent Ordinances Dating to 1950 N - 1981 Draft Denial Resolution - Alden Anderson property, 1900 Shoreline Dr. (similar ease) Council originally reviewed this application in May, 1985 as a zoning appeal, at which time Council gave applicant general direction that perhaps 1 additional building site would be considered, but that 2 additional building sites -lould not be looked upon favorably. Please review Exhibit D, the composite site plan for this 2.9 acre group of parcels. Applicant is requesting permission to build houses on each of the two vacant lots adjacent to his home. The lots are substandard in area and width based on the current 2-acne, 200 foot width standards. To briefly review the code standards that previously and currently affect this property: 1950 Zoning Ordinance - !Prior to division of this property into separate parcels) - Property zoned 1-acre min. lot size. 1955 - Original Platting Code 1958 - Ferrell builds house at 3405 Watertown Road, requests to build a second house on property per minutes of 9/22/58. Ferrell presumably told by Herb Ross, Mayor, that in order to build a second house would require a subdivision, since 1950 zoning ordinance allowed only one residence per lot. 1959 - Ferrell presumably completed subdivision. 10/12/59 - Adoption of Ordinance #22 - a) required minimum lot area of 1 acre, min. lot width of 1401, which Ferrell lots would meet or nearly meet. b) also allowed Council to approve building hermits for substandard lots held in single separate ownership, inferred that substandard common- Zoning File #990 March 3, 1.986 Page 2 ownership lots would not be granted building permits, and established +-hat the Council could allow variances to this section at Counci1Is discretion. 1967 "oning Code - Property-�ti.11 zoned 1 acre, 140' width, no substantial changes from 1959 Ordinance #22, Lu;- did state that substandard existing lots of record as of 9/14/b7 under single separate ownership could be granted building permits if the Council finds they would not adversely affect public health or safety. Did not specifically discuss common ownership lots, but by omission inferred again they would not be granted permits. 1974 'Zoning Code - Property rezoned to 2-acre, 200' minimum width. This code set specific standards for use of substandard single separate ownership lots of record in the 2 acre zone i.e.: 1) must be at least 1 acre, 100' width 2) must meet all septic requirements or be sewered 3) meets all other applicable stai.latus But again, the 1974 code specifically did not discuss common ownership lots. The Alden Anderson common ownership lot buildability application at 1900 Shoreline Drive was denied .in 1981 based on lacx of the required 2 acre lot area, setting a precedent for denial of situations such as Fer.rell's. 1984 Zoning Code - rf irE )until approval to separate (read "sell") adjacent undevelopc non -conforming commonly owned lots if the resulting lots do not meet area or width standards. Clearly in the Ferrell. case, Council approval is required in order to separate the confcrmina 2.9 acre group of parcels into substandard parcels. Note that the 0.85 acre center lot, which would only be ap imately 0.97 acre even if road right-of-way was included, would likely nave required a variance under all previous zoning codes, and both vacant parcels would have required variances -'r.ce tl,.e 1974 zoning code. Finally, please review the eyhibits, especially the memo's of 11/13/85 and 2/6/86. Planning Commission reviewed this application on 2/18/86 and recommended denial of 2 additional building sites, but recommended approval of 1 additional site for a density of approximately 1.5 acres per building site (see exhibit D). Approva . -3f even 1 new site will set a precedent in complete reversal of the Alden Anderson denial in 1981. Weigh this against the fact that applicant has shown that the 2 proposed building sites both can meet the septic code requirements if development of the property is minimal (no swimming pools, no tennis courts). Staff will draf' , resolution for your next meeting reflecting Council's direction. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 t$50.00 per each additional project) After -the -Fact Fees (Additional $50.00 payment per each project) --------------------------------------------------------------- ---- is f,7 PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D. Uc� Please check one -- Is the property 1" abstract or torrens? Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. -----I--------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT N,. Phone Ma- Ii.ng Address / �1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER Name r Phone Mailing Address / Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) 4A&wwmd--) also owr the adjacent parcels of la-d. ---------------------------------- ---- PRE.`'FNT USE OFPROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Otter (specify) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $_,�' Describe request in detail: VARIANCES REQUIRED------------------------------------------- - Lot Area Lot width Hardcover 1 Setback Variances ( Front Side _ Rear) Other (OVER) C= O LA- C—) HARDSHIP De. a undue h,; nract'cal difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zor... atior.s.__ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAI, PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventin compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: l - ------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- REQUfRED SUBMITTALS 1, 1. Completed A-ilication Form.; 2. Certified Prop, rty Owners List of owner ithi , 'fl eod`can ` ain this list from Hennepin Ccunty Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) 3. Stamper, legal sized envelopes ( #10 ) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat. Map. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must. ign this appli,,;It � cn. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. ---------- .------------------------------------- --.---------- -- APPT ICANT' S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide ail '.nfcrniat,ion� etl�i.ired or requested by the Zoning A 1ranistrator, agrees to pay all fees and/br_tinusttal expenses incurred in review of this appli( tion, and certif ies that the information supplied is truG and correct to the best ;.f his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature 11 Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The ier hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and I,.L'ther authorizes reasonable entrA, onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members. and Council members for purposes of investigation and , rification of this requ;st. Owner's signature -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 da}s tee`^re the Planning Commissior Meeting. Planninq Cor;oi ssion Meetings are held on the third Monday cif cac h most th . CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATIW Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional project) After -the -Fact Fees (Additional $50.00 payment per each project) --------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION it Site Address 3�?�,5 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Please check one -- Is the property- abstract or torrens? Please attach legal description to application if :iot included on required survey. ------------------------------------------------------------ APPi,ICANT 1 - Name} Phone Mailing Address hlyllC i OWNER Name Y1/%/' r� - /' ! lC Phone % l -- Mailing Address Date Property Acquired/ :'__ (month/year) I (do) (.) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ------------------------ ----•------------------F-- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Pres(--n" 3onin, District Present Use of Property — Residential Other (specify) ---------------------------------------------------------------- --- DESCRIPTION OF r�'OUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ %L C ! - Describe request in detail: V11JtIANCP.S REQUIRED----------------------- -------------------- �'�►------'j.=,� Lot Area y� )t Width Hardcover C o� Setback Vari. nces (, , )nt Side Rear) Ot tier ----------------------------- -- -- --------------«-- --- ---- HARDS11I P Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulti.n tram st... ,J enforcement of zoning rcguIations :—E''s`'"'a-` - --------------------------------- -- ----------------------- IL b'SCF ;ON OF UNUSUI L PROPERTY CONDITIONS D+.. r- -anusual property conditions prev,-ating compliance with Zoning Code REQUIRED S'U13MIITALS 1. Completed Application Form. :. Certified Property t of owners within 150' (y(__ an obtain this list f rom tic.nnepin County Depa, mc:nt of Finance A-603 Gov,>rnment Canter 348-327). ) 3. Stamper?, legal sized envelopes ( #10 ) pre --addressed ach cf th- names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. . Plat liap. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this appIiciCr' ._ �,.- Please--rememb, r thnot at your variance application is not if then�gor-mati,on, has n; � 't _ been included. J -------------------------------------------------i.�-alb► =9-real--------- APPLICA.NT'S SIGNATURE The applica I r • oy aor..es to provide ill infor^at;Jn required or zeqursted by the Zoning Administr -�yrees to pay all fees 4 . /-r unusual expenses incurred in r 'view of this app, on, and certif ies that informat ion supplied is true and correct tc the bt- of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature t t- t, _z t OWNERS SIGNATURE The (,wner h--eby ac,cnow.edge and agreeb to this appl _ation ind furtl-er authorizes rt.aE-cable A^l-ry _o the property by City staffsulta.its, gentE, -omm- ; oik t1:NT1)e. s, an..l Council member- for pur. _ t-s of st igat on and verif ica . f this cequest . O'rnpr's s:.Ir atur•e ��il . / -_ _ Date Applicant muse. have all submittals into the City off.ties 25 days before •n Planning Commission Meet inq. PInnninMf -ct ins re held on the _:iird Monday cif -ich month. 1525 �6) o 200 vs••s7,11 • ; 1 .�t I I 1 _s. 25 v SISTER o, �L 3 Z800 30C LAP AsMA 5=19 �"? I tt.a r•s A No 2Ci f) ED LAND SURVEY NO.84 RUN DATE 02!04/OS bATCH 003 38 OS-117-23 11 ON! PROP ADM 03405 NIGH LA O:`itR NAME CYRIL L DUCNAIMIE ETAL ♦AvPAffR CYRIL L MXHARME ►:AME/AD',IR 3405 NIGH LANE LONG Lu E MN S33% 38 32-118-:3 43 0009 PROP AOOR 05445 WATFRTOWN RO Lti.AR nAit R T QUADY ETAL TA,(PATER ROBERT T GUADY NAME/ADOR 3"S S MATER70WH RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 36 32-118-23 44 0003 PROP ADM 03280 MATERTOWN RD C+.NLR NAM D A M HART TA -PAYER DOUGLAS N HART NAZI/ADOR 3280 WATERTOWN ROAD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 32-118-23 44 00" PROP ADOR 033" WATERTOWN RO C.T4ER NAME R A i RICE TA. -PAYER JEROME S RICE h-%ME/ADC* 40ZS WATERTOWN ROAD MAPLE PLAIN MN SSSS9 38 32-116-23 44 0009 SOP ADDR 03485 WATERTOWN RD O► 40 NA!4E WARD IFRPEII ETAL TAXPAYER WARD P FERRELL NAME/ADOR 3405 WATERTOWN ROAD LONG LAKE MH 55356 Nk .,kN-.Y PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0;44ERS LIST 38 OS-117-23 11 0005 00095 LEAF ST E C GRAHAM JR ETAL E C GRAHAM JP 95 LEAF ST LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 32-118-23 43 0010 03425 WATERTOWN RD WANDA L PETERSEN WANDA L PETERSEN PT 2 BOX 425 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 32-118-23 44 0004 03340 WATERTOWN RD VERNE Ht"BELL VERNE HUBBELL 3340 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 32-118-23 44 0007 03405 WATERTCW'N RD WARD FERRELL ETAL WARD FERRELL 3405 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE YN 55356 38 32-118-23 44 0010 MARY FARRELL ETAL WARD FERRELL 3405 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE NN 55356 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 6 38 05-117-23 12 0014 03420 HIGH LA H W WOLVERTON ETAL H WESLEY WOLVERTON 3420 HIGH LkiE LONG LAKE !'4 55356 38 32-118-23 43 0011 L D MACKINNON E L MACKINNON !_EONARD D & LINDA MACKINNGN -400 W.ATERTO 4 ROAD LONG LAKE MN 55356 3 32-118-23 44 0005 03360 WATERTOWN RD V & M HUBBELL VERNE M HUBBELL 3340 WATERTOWN ROAD LC!;G LAKE MN 55356 38 32-118-23 44 0008 WARD FERRELL ETAL CARD FERRELL 3405 WATERTO'.1N RD LONE LAKE M`? 55356 TOTAL BATCH 003 OCC14 E.XH. N ZONING FILE NO. 990 S -/C I7 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTICN P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 2/20/26 TO: Ward Ferrell 3405 Watertown R.�ad Long Lake, MN 55356 TYPE. OF APPLICATION: Variance Dat of Meeting: 2/18/86 Vote: 5 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Denial: For reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Commission noted for the record that the zoning on this property has undergone changes during this applicant's ownership, and that lots that might have been granted Council approval as building sites under previous zoning codes are now considered substandard. Planning Commission also recognized that the applicant has intended to build on each of the two vacant properties for a number of years, and has kept the properties as separate tax parcels during that time period. Furthermore, Planning Commission finds that the applicant has demonstrated that, under certain limited development conditions, suitable area exists on each of the vacant lots for a primary and alternate drainfield site, while maintaining an alternate drainfield site to serve the existing developed homesite. Based on the above findings, and noting that the majority of existing developed lots within a radius of 1/2 mile are less than 2 acres in area, Planning Commission recommends denial of variances to allow 2 new building sites, but recommends that the Council allow one new building site, for an average development density of 1.5 acres per building site for the property. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is cr:ifirmed as: Council - March 10, 1986 If the applicant has trouble obtaining additional information, please contact the Zoning Department (473-7357). If you desire certified cepies of the off.cial Planning Commission minutes, they are available from tf a City Recorder after -eview and approval by the Planning Commission. ku r�/- n ' 16 —epar�e-d by me or undcr my dl?.Lvt cl. and that I am in, ddy Kc:!"Sle-rd L; survryar uneier the laws ofthe st- t of esots. -7s, Re,- No AI Al .......... O L J� E a "O.S. A&3' 40q A 'C- t AC- ± 3L of AS of :9 it U-sa-lis-zi AC -r u 046 z a I r� IAN N N E% _.-- Plat of Survey for Ward P. Ferrell C P4 x in the SE 1/4 of section 32, T118N, R23W 4 ` y /4( �41 r i+ t . 3 L t -,� M 41 of 3 a V4 rf Sic 3 a - 119 2 3 3•? • SL- l hereby certifyy that this survey, plan. or report wns prepared by we or under my dirod super- visiosD and that I am a du''y Registered Surveyor under the laws of the State of Miao- esota. pat..—lS—aS1 4 g N It 1% r a _1 k 1). •tS' (50 r*.dI) .F Ste 3r • Its • a 3 Certificate of Survey: I h-!rebv cprtl!`hr that this is a true and corr"t r-pro.twrltatior. or c su: rr� of th^ houndn ips of that part of the Southeast 1/4 of Sa-tion 32, T113',, R23W, dascri h-d as ollows : r'otmaencinF at a point on the South line cf snid :�outhpasl, iurtrt �r, G r<;ds boat o`' thq : authQnat corner ther9of; thence West alonf- said .Jout� tin- 2( ? fn(,t; th^nice aort?, ut right ar.;-les to said South line to the puhl i, rond; hpnc- :Jovtheastnrl'v alonf said road to a point directly Gnrth of thnncs :'outY, to t� roint of be(-inninF; and yh- icr t,uildin; 9 tl^r-on, and all viritl- -ar.croac,hm-nt-,, if,n; , from r-ll-y, Jr1342— rGrdor P. "offin RpF• 'tiL ''r% Lor,� ;.ekA, MrnAsct+: A H 1 -4 No • � �I7� - ` yam/ .�t ✓ L�- HG#=L,ti( �-..-�u\Q+'.�Et++-C` I r CF -t- THE PR�""�J-gEa,�,�•'- W - -i �_ PROPERTY C� {aA�, ADO �► A4 S'—' -y- t� s PercAlotiOn Tests Scare 1 � a� xSod Borings- ® Bench Mork GZ� I✓ C t^r )' 2 ! }J N �C . r„ Note This system is to be constructed to meet the Minnesota Pollution Control agency $-P TESTING INC. X Standards - WPC 40 5 Local Ordnance Desqned By Date 1 612 - 497-3566 1,X/ Plat of Survey for Ware? P. Ferr,-ll in the SE 1/4 of Srtctior. 32, T11SN, P.23W attic �'• �: t(�:`.- � i ^�1 Certificate of Survey: I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a su_^vey of the boundaries of all thtt part of the Southeast quarter of Section 32, T118N, P.23W, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South line of' said South- east quarter, 1088 feet 'West of the South- east corner thereof; thence i�est along said South line 140 feet; thence north at right angle- to said South line to the public road; thence Southeasterly along said road to its intersection with a line drawn North through the point of beginning at right angles to the South lin,. of said Southeast quarter; thence South to tie point of beginning; and of the location of all buildinE-s thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or on said land. Q W.m. S. Kellev, Jr. Agr. No. 1342 Bruce H. Kelley Reg. Nc. 5713 Gordon R. Coffin Reg, No. 6064 K rr L X � KELL�.Y , Engineers Long Lake, Minnesota Scel 1^ = 50, Date : January 12, o Iron marker s iin` of SE st of 3Z- III sa corner °t OF Src 34 I18 jJ� 1959 I he: eby certify that this survey, plan, or report• was prepared by me or under my direct super. vision and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the lams of the State of &M nn- esota A �-9 od s�� „o P► vti� ��. s : �.- A$ i 1,5 M : -,ro P of- wrE 4--1.- PG 5T _ t ►� Wit+ � N.f� - Q'Pr1?PIG�F'�'1' C,0>F-}►�.. _M16N • Percolation Tests Scale: x Soil Borings: ® Senth Mork Note; This system is to be constructed to meet the Minnesota Pollution %,�ntrd Agency Standards - W PC 40 a Lot at Ordinance 7�. I I Wpm �P tart+ Heitz q e-al Cfr -ttaC-, W-t)QoSGv j+V-E4'*f* C e-lr-Ot•--4�- 4& PROPERT i 1 Designed E _ - - - --I Dare $ r 4 *a A7 • �rcolallon 'rests scale E34XNS: Mork Th5, system is to be constructed to mee* the N%nnesoto Pollution C:"foi Agency St.ondoirct, - W PC 40 9 Lok a! Ordinance ?I S PROPERTY CF: W23-M f-'CE �L —� S - P TESTING Wt Desgieri, By' Dole a/a6i`j:s-PH.62-497-3566 - A: -(S S,s-- -..s•-ie -Or- ..:_ ;-Cxe-y -es 1Ai _ we S ._,S L--_.-er• crer = ' am 'clots , s••ecrrs - •^•r• a-• tree ai4 rror- vcce••y .-,es NOTE: Power supply and swi•ches rest be located ,n a weat",.er prec` enc,oswe Wside the �. rOrn ue S pump.ng chamber and manhole •.mac:. _ : d;s. � =IIS.vr ees SCIL 9CTNG E .EV7 Cti:, —�—�r' , 1•�C lL�y�—. H8, -•-tea T%I�b ��O•� grade_i__%73 ^� ., ,��:c •c 'a^, PRESSURE DtSTR -X17CN MOUND SYSTEM -4 vca ros' - PR0'OS_D PLMP- NG 4.•0 6 Cc px , ,. _��.-3?. Q OESGN-VAOUhC P�f!os kcus� -S Avercge prco'chOr. rc•e Ila-r,./oxh (desq, 83sa41 oree•nrer• orea pergo'. of dai!y sewage f'aw) icor ■ H's0 ~ /pa Z'1S sQ r• cd *eaMneM oreo 0 0 �• =- sp N ! = �pr w,d•h =�� ft.�en,jlh of Jed crea +side s'ope run Ito 1 x�4 height= �2 ft.x�`� ft, lcwn area needed? -e--w - :►Q sc r• ♦ec'-10 - crea . _ deM •;,tw y Spa h-27=1i%-cjVft (3/4 to 2'/c dia. , inc!udes 2 •c$ rocK above pipe' • Ora. rccr ^eeaed rL : c. r,'s awr - , 5=':r aam cmh r ' -LILG,, yft aWca , •cpso, 6' L4 ')_cu. yd. Li3vE1 . 5► V-1,D AE-Ac� t' a ) . J"S Apt c -k . S. `ar* 12=gc , 2-,C'7M it L90, m,rrnms CPwL nn.n 7 $07..1 �•►��.�H►� GNNmRF.(t.! +arv�oer copoc •y - 25% C, oo f Imap '''ar a' AQgOI=1Ll90f . reserve sbro¢ Of 759W /bedreorn=ems got • c!pe bock drake— tr / ' ^ 0 w . • �' y� db ti..^y yoe , '„ •. „teem. -�,i_ . '� qa • -MAO d si qa / Ors ' n'• 0 ? " d;a D i?e , 'n `, needed 21- A go'. , It •y "MOed2�1Lr (O+t oho br R+ntp: C.. « 0 , S t, :,+rl C.0. P ,'') . in Poe I:ft , ILIL V h , t L1 #a ow#wa' crs T -- opw Nest-�u. CU. -11 IV ! M/ vcVt cow -*v IY go 4 cyt t S ' !O� C .. %e v %i. M"D 9K- rv�e�s-oped tio'• rr „ , Dvance c reo•menf ores o� recgnccr,�q S- f rEsrl!`1c C. •r ,� •o a %W r f-c fro e•,v, ng rrt0tmv. tree �:Trfr SitQ '� H t� `�.�` Oesreed =-r h A Flat of Survey for Ward F. Ferrell in the SE 1/4 of Section 32, Tlldh, F23W tb", f \\\ Road \tie Se4 iran :� Praxir.ele( an ft/W It.t FXH IV \� Certificate of Survey: I hereby certify that this is a true ��,,,and correct rnpreser_tation of a survey of th boundaries of all that part of the \\ Southeast quarter of Section 32, T116K, R23W, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South linrw cf' said South - 'east quarter, 1223 fr-Pt west of the South- ,�ast corner thereof; th^rxr� 'west along \ said Lout1, line 140 fPet; th-nce ;.crt' nt right an€1es to said "Icuth line to the public road; thence Soutf,ez�stprly alon€ said road to its intersf-ctior. with a line drawn north throufh tlIe point of beginning at right anp les to the :i0UC1, lir,^ of said -outhehst quarter; th, irco- ;outl: to the point of b•�Finninf•; and of the location of all buildinf's thereon, and all visibl^ eacr-ohcl.mpr;ts, if any, frcr, or on said land. Wm. S. heel--y,Jr.rNo. 13 2 .E 4 Bruce fi . Kelley 1'er . No. 5713 Cordcn , -offin P; too. EG64 'k Kr.LL',.Y , i-nrinmers Long LAP, Minn -sots N 0 tic 9 N ale : l" _ `'C I Date inui:ry 12, 1),? i o Imn ..wrlcr /5 IiM of St? YI of n _ 14O• �• laa�' 1 Sic c..... of se # -- 1 hereby car :hat this survey. lad. or r epor -4 sec �c us zs - was prep.ired 6y me or under my direct super` vision end [hit I am u duly Registered Lane! SS rive) "r "ader the laws of the State of NJ=" -y1 `1c'+'GbC-O MW1�►M /a � C��t O1R1lrlA�Y� - � L M aMt—�� t?tFpQG?,t�0 -------�lit. AKA L- 1 Tu , of --frf E `. rovr -- Jrl.�•r=/ f fad Y►iwir--159, �.. T N c ij E CRY Vi ► C • 'erCOtoltCn Tes!5 $cote - 1 • 5o,t !3ormgs Note This sys'efn rs Ta be constructed to meet the MnneSoto Pollution Con•roi Ager y Srondores - WPC 40 3 Locci Oranonce '�Rti�"rmEH'C R�EitS, b�FOF•'� 6 AF"�'F-� GCµS-f�µGrC1OT-� Cestgne.: 3y '- �,ve Q i-IE/5 or 6.2 - 497- 356� u St � t=c D !� O t ►.� i tiY ` J v H t v ./ ;s, ze 'an% '-:'r -•cperty li. es ".,,. well`s T t:'T:e�• c,eo " `ram Vkes , _.strl 'rewmer` oreo a0' `roT —,maer'y lines `roT we'`s -qt),'rorn 5'tgs. r.am .r�Ps f' • � 1 ' z �. supQi T � :ank y„ 1 • ir+ � T Chorrur T�,QE_ =, � '`�'"+• , 4,Jercge GercoV.on rCe ',? .S rr•n.ArCh (desgn.83sq.f` frea+men, orea gc /day x 83s k /gc'. ; 1 Z sq &t of tmc'ment area • 10% sq ff. (= !Oft. width = ft.!( ti L,. sc f' •re cement creo x ± . o f de::`- c` rock 41 cu.f* — 27 =..lSa-aa.ycs. ( 3/4 �, •� 5 .^'' ` GE _ S�-" cy oam back cu.yds. apvox. , . ofO•r r CK nee,`e. -N r) : �S cxv:,' ` •• /�,�� _�^�pw ♦�k� r��J�� � � :• •a:^.k,.13'Y�Cj_. 1 ��.�y^KLMCidga'.m`nm%mstx--l'-..vS v1lt1'1 _'^N� y _�crr�e► cc:,cc•y- 25% cl do,'ysewage `,w c` gol.-!i.Lgai.+reserve s'aecx of 75gc L'c% 7 i a _• ► 'L �a s:�^'y ppe, 'in4- - _�^�♦ `_go'.imantfo'dl°s�-0g.�'/IGrJt:n a! Calf.♦y r�er,:� ��- c''_5 orea fpr Sc gal . M 1n 1 s•r bl:• on L . .. ale -�.ja d�a _ ! -: im fr. , *ala :,e::�rc• .ns ceoac,,y � go! 4 cycles ",joy) 4) U bG0 N't' a AID �. c s^ 1CC — C'e. :m s`.G:;ed ".Q' _ s 'o C ve- -c`• fro'* ewer:ng trec•rr,e— crec r 'rom !oKes , _' streams al4' Ir -n oroper•y 'Aes NOTE: Power -upp'y and swt+Ches mst be located ;n o . � o. r wea+her proof enctisure o_". to 'he %-no,ng c'�raer and menho'e �o''•om �':Ss. L' °'orn'lies _ SC'!- BCR'NG E± E1,'a7.0NS � • T1---'- daJsV We __i,T �' -I C'— • — 1 � � ' � i R � �O -' � Q `! g rode _.�._ % T H •.2 PRESSURE DISTRBLMON MCA' !NO gYSTE`f » T`'.3 Chorrder E!-�N'a'.ON at PgO°OSED PL}MP' i gn .83 sq.ft treatment area per go. of daily sewage f ow! 1Oft. wid'h = . ft.lertgth of bed area +srde s'ope run 1.to I x2.d he;gt?= =4 O ft.x Uj f!. Town- area needed) ft; 27 =-Lk- cti.yds, ( 3/4'to 2 !/2' d-,a. , inc4;des 2" V rock above p ps ` �. _ cu yds. approx. , tcasol! 6 CU yd. C AQ— SOU rruTT$(P1..%1S Mt%1 •) so T11P1?+�1.� LMrt�/►'tt .pt ) ol.+ reserve s'oraw of 75ga / bedroom = a gal + D pe t.xK d►orace — ;' + mon4o'd &-,S2gd./l0ol:nftof a "dio. Pipe, !n 10 needed �) , 2, gc'. 3 0 "Jf-'AO ) %ole: J s'cnce from t•ef+•rr,er, 'RO°_4TY 0' : S- P 'EST/l'/G /IVC• w YEAR vacant 1.07 acres PID 0007 MKT VALUE TAX Exhibit J TAX VALUATION HISTORY Ward Ferrell 3405 Idatertc ern R., vacant 0.85 acre PID 0008 "^ VALUE TAX with hoi se vacant 0.91 acre. 0.10 acre PID 0009 PID 0010 MKT VALUE* TAX** MKT VALUE TAX TOTAL TAX (Before Homestf=.,:: 1985 5,000 198.60 5,000 198.60 25,000 2,064.62 200 7.94 2,469.76 1984 5,000 205.54 5,000 205.54 25,000 2,121.22 200 8.22 2,540.52 1983 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5,000 193.50 5,000 193.50 25,000 2,097.92 20,. 7.74 2,492.66 1982 10,400 384.30 6,600 243.88 14,100 1,628.12 220 8.12 2,264.42 1981 10,400 354.32 6,600 224.86 14,200 1,534.20 220 7.48 2,120.86 1980 9,200 283.98 5,800 212.98 13,960 1,596.70 200 5.82 2,099.48 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (12,500)*** 1979 5,100 198.42 5,100 198.42 7,070 1,674.92 120 3.88 2,075.64 (5,900) 1978 4,600 183.90 4,600 183.90 6,240 1,688.56 110 3.96 2,060.32 (5,300) 1977 4,200 169.46 4,200 169.46 4,740 1,657.63 110 4.04 2,OCO.59 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (4,235) 1976 3,500 151..78 3,500 151.78 **** 1,460.46 90 3.92 1,767.94 1975 3,200 154.14 3,200 154.14 **** 1,457.43 90 4.36 1,770.07 1974 3,200 141.38 3,200 141.38 **** 1,341.98 90 4.00 1,628.74 *Market value of land portion only **Tax on land and structures ***Number in parentheses is Limited Value of land portion; Market Value number was calculated Using the formula: Limited value of land portion MKT VALUE _----------------------------------- x MKT VALUE land and structures Limited value of land and structure ****During these vears the tax records do not indicate the values of land and structures separately City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Mel OW . Al .1 A IIESOLUTI014 DENYING `.ARIANCES REQUESTED BY ALDEN ANDERSON FOR A PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED '\S TRACTS C AND D, REGISTERED LAND SURV'. Y 96 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State Statutes 412 et. sect. and 462 et. seq. the City Council has adopted zoning regulations for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, Alden Anderson has applied for a lot widt,, and lot a :a variance to per: -it construction of a new single fau;ily residence on a property legally described as Tract C and Tract D, Registered Land Survey 96, hereinafter referred to as the property; arid V;:iE'REAS, tine City Coun,..il has reviewed the application; the recommendations of staff and the Planning Commission; cor%-rents of the neighboring property owners; and letters and comments made by the applicant. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, th it the City Council of the City of Orono hereby denies the requested ice width and lot area variances ,Section 34.352) for Tracts C and D R.L.S. 96, and denies oti�er required variances, which variances are lot area variance (Section 34.352) Tracts E & F, R.L.S. 96 and development of c,ubstandard lots of record 'held in common ownership (Section 31.202) for Tract C, D, E and F, R.L.S. 96, based upon one or more of the following findings of fact concerning this property: 1) The property is located in the LR-lA Single Family Lakeshore Resiuential District which has the following minimum lot requirements: Section 34.352 rot Area = 2 acres Lot Width =t00 ft. Front setback = 50 ft. Lake setback = 75 ft. Sipe setback = 30 ft. 2) Tract C, the proposed building lot is deficient in regards to lot area and lot width requirement; as follows: Tract C's arva exclusive of road easement per Section 31.204 is 1.7 acres - short 13,068 sf or 151 Tract C's actual width is 110.3 tt. - short 79.7 ft or 402 Clay Of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3) ':Tact E, the developed lot is also deficient in regards to .lot area requi reic.ents as follows: Tract. E's aroa :�:Kc:lusive of road cas ement per. Section 31.204 is 1.4 acres - .,hest 26,1116 sf or 30% 4) Comb i.nt? 'Ira .ts C & D, R.L.S. 96 and combined Tract E & F, P.L. . 96 have be::n owrin..l in common by Anderson from May 23, 19 6 to Lhe 5) Tia-_,is C, D, I , an-C', F v: er:e owned In cornmon by Sam Houston C:u f'nl n an6 '',ort^_nce _''ii_i,,,ret Huffman since Octobel14, 197.2 ai tho ti;n%! of the _-eplat:t:inr, of Lot 4 and 4A Auditor's 6) L'. cacti t Tracts C i::cy i, .car!—! used its lawn area and additional li ki3 lc':ess for the e.xist;.n:f resi.-lence on calPlbined Tracts C r.t:i:: r . ''i i i_h `. iii s ise :-'iG with the lots in com 7ron ownership, all the District zoil4 ny req,U4 cements. 7) A new home on rr3cz C oould require an additional curb cut ,n a section of Shoreline Drive that is hea.,ily trafficked and already has an excessive nu,;.ber -)f accesses serving ,.�!::isting houses. 3) loth Tracts C and E have been zoned for a minimum, lot size of 2 acres 3in,:e Ordinance No. 172 in 1974 at which tame the two lots were held in co*-rton ownership by Alden L. AnJerson and Helen i•'. Anderson and which lots corr.bit A met the requirements of this zoning density. 9) Denial of th:^ subjec*- variances would not constitute a taking of property or loss of substantial value because Tract C has always had value and been used as requir area and yard space for the residence on Tract E. 10) Section 31.203 of the zoning code provides for d,!velopm.ent of lots of record of greater than one., acre held in separate �,wnersh: p since prior to the offecti.,e date of the zoning rc•g,--lations. Tracts C and D do not conform to this section uecaLse they were in co:-t:rcrr ownership with Tracts E and F s irice 1974 to the present. 11) The City Council has always require.] that when two or more lets are owned in common, each lot must individually meet or exceed the requirements of the Zoning Code before any if the lots can be built upon and that two or more substandard lets owned in common must be combined so that the resulting combined lot meets the requirements IJ th•2 Zoning Code before the lots can be t�uill, upon. City of oRONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 12) The granting of such a variance would require amending the mangy• sections of the Comprehensive Plan that govern the rural development of the City. The City of Orono has been consistent in requiring a minimum of two acres for a buildable lot in the rural areas cf the City where there is no sewer service. n).The granting of such a variance would require the rezoning of the property to an urban lot size in add-'_tion to requiring the extension of City services tc the proper't.' to maintain a suitable level of fire protection. 14, The assessed fair market v.31u _ of coTbi :n_d Tracts C and D "r-)m 1959 to 1982 show it assessed as an inc-eri,ental .•- l.ue whin compared to the assessed fair market value of combined Tracts E and F over the sane period of time. 15) The: granting of the required variances ;muld result in ttic following violations of Section 32.340 of the Zoning Code with which the applicant must first cor-;;ly be:ere the required variances can be granted: a) The variances would have an .adverse effect upon the health, safety and welfa-re of the corr:.unity for the rea ons outlined herein. b) The safety and welfare of the corwr.unit_: could b=, adversely affected for the reasons outlined herein, especially increased traffic and drainage problems. c) The amount of light and air in the neighborhood would be by adding a structure on the substandard lot. d) The values of surrounding properties will be adversely affected. e) 'There are no special conditions applying, to the land in cuestien which are peculiar to the land or .srriediately adjoining property. >;) The condition of having a substandard lot or two ad;acent substandard lots held in common applies generally in the lakeshore residential districts. ,j) The granting of the application is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the -.Ihplicant. 10 The _3rantinj of the variances will impair the I.:c:Ilth, safety, c.onfort. Ind be ccntrary to the intent 1)` the Zc�nin: l and comprehensive Ple n. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. .1., The granting of the variances will serve mainly as a. convenience to the applicant, and is not necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. 16) The applicant has riot introduced any evidence contrary to any of the above findings of fact. The applicant has claimed only that combined Tracts and D would be of greater value to him if he could sell it to a third party with the variances necessary to build a home upon 17) The granting of sucn a variance would require the extension of City water and sewer to maintain the standards setforth in the Orono 'Zoning Co(7 ai.d Comprehensive Plan for an urban sized lot. 18) Ir_ granting such a variance, Council would abandon a longstanding, consistent policy in consideration of the buildability of substandard lots under common ownership and thereby establish an adverse precedent. 19) In order to put everyone on notice that the above referenced substandard lots in comaTon ownership rust remain under common ownership to maintain the existing house as a conforming use, Council hv�-reby directs the City staff to file such notice against the properties legally describ,-?d as Tracts C, D, E, and F, R.L.S. 96. Adopted by the City Council of the City of. Orono, Minnesota -)n the day of 1981. William B. 'Ian Nost, mayor ATTEST: ATE- r a M. Strom, City Clerk -- MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 18, 1986 #842 ROBERT ZIMMERMAN continued Assistant Zoning Adm� 4strator Gaffron stated that there is no known opposit_ from the neighbors and all have been re -notified. It was moved by McDonald, seconded by Goetten, to recommend approval of the 3.5% hardcover variance in the 75-250' zone, conditioned on the applicant removir.q 2 areas of gravel and the existing detached garage structure. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #967 6 #968 JOHN 13. IDSTROM 2580 FOX STREET PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 8:53 - 9:07 John B. Idstrom and David M. Ostreim were present for this matter. Mr. Idstrom's engineer, Mark Gronberg, was also present. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request for a two lot subdivision (there are no houses on the lot presently) creating a new building sites. He noted that both lots meet the 2 acre dry buildable minimum and standards for septic systems. He also noted that there is a potential for a future 3rd lot which would also meet the 2 acre requirement. It was noted that applicant is requesting approval for the driveway to access onto Fox Street to serve both proposed building site:,. Planning Commission discussed the proposed driveway which will cross the designated wetland in order to access the rear building site. It was noted t,iat the Watershed District has approved this crossing. There were no comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Rovegno, seconded by Taylor, to recommend approval of the preliminary subdivision and conditional, use permit subject to staff's recommendations. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 0 AI:D FERRELI, 3411 63415 WATERTOWN ROAD VARIANCE - SECOND REVIEW Ward Ferrell was present for this matter. Assistant Zoning Adm.ni.strator Gaffror explained that this application was reviewed approximately 6 months ago on an appeal basis giving the applicant a general idea regarding the c.ity's policy regarding situations of three contiguous substandard lots in common ownership. I MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD FEBRbARY 18, 1986 #990 WARD FERRELL continued All the Planning Commission members basically concurred with their opinions stated at the November 18, 1985 Planning Commission meeting, that this property should be allowed a total of only 2 buildable lots. Mr. Ferrell stated tha`. the City of Orono requested him to divide the propert; back in 1958 so there would not be future problems with building another home, and that this fact should be honored. He also noted that when the zoning changed from a 1 acre to a 2 acre zoning district, he was told that this would not affect existing lots. Assistant Zoning Administor Gaffron reviewed the history of zoning changes in that area from 1950 to 1984. He noted that the proposed lots meet the criteria required of lots in single separate ownership based on the 1975 zoning code, but a density issue ane setting a precedent are open, because these are substandard lots in common ownership. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Taylor, to recommend denial of the 3 lots because they do not meet applicable zoning code criteria. Motion, Ayes 2, Nays 3. Motion dies. Rovegno, McDonald, and Goetten voted nay. Rovegno stated that he felt this is a difficult decision because it seems that 3 lots would have met code requirements up until a few years ago. iicLt,;,ald stated that because of the many years of ownership by applicant, it would be inappropriate to deny. Goetten concurred with McDonald in -'is matter and stated that 2 lots would be acceptable. It was moved by Rovegno, seconded by Goetten, to recommend denial of 3 lots but could recommend approval of a total of 2 properly laid out building sites and recognizes the efforts, time and reliance the applicant has put in his 1958 application but still recommend denial of 3 lots. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #999 EVAN MELINE 3598 NORTH SHORE DRIVE VARIANCE - SECOND REVIEW Benn Belden, being half owner of the property, was present for this matter. He noted that Evan Meline was unable to be present because he is in Europe. This application was Planning Commission could firm -up plans t Hennepin County. tabled from the December 16, 1985 ..eting, so that the applicants o purchase additional property from 6 To: Planning Commission Members ci x# - P don From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator Date: February 6, 1986 Subject: #990 Ward Ferrell 3405-3411-3415 Watertown Road - Variances - Update to Memo of November 13, 1985 List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Memo of 11/13/85 With Exhibits Exhibit B - Survey of Property With Existing House Exhibit C - Soils Report, Site Plan For Existing House Exhibit D - Planning Commission Minutes 11/18/85 CXH, E - sr•r: k.t," Mr. Ferrell has now submitted the additional survey and soils report to show an alternate drainfield Eite for the rxisting house. Given no future encroachments, there is adequate area on the lot with the existing house to replace the septic system with a fully conforming system. Please review the memo of 11/13/85. As noted in that memo and considering the additional information submitted, it appears technically possible to place a house, garage, driveway, well, and primary anri alternate septic systems on each of the lots. The possible house location would be somewhat limited by the drainfield sites. There would be potential conflicts if a situation occurred where an extremely large house, pool, tennis court, etc. were proposed. The properties lend themselves to relatively low levels of development. Finally, from a zoning code standpoint, even if only one new building site is granted, this is precedent setting. In the past, Council and Planning Commission have generally held the line in similar unsewered co,;,mon ownership situations. Approval of 1 or 2 new building sites might have long-term impact on Orono's effectiveness in avoiding sewer. weigh this against the applicant's real and preceived rights as a property owner and th( history of zoning coda changes over the years. Are the,u sufficient justifications to grant a variance? MINUTES 01' THE PI-ACN1NG COMMISSION MEETING HI'LI' NOVEMBER 18, 1985. PAGE 4 1988 MERTES continued Tom Corson, 3241 Casco Circle, was present and stated that i the lot in question was not consistent with the other lots in I the area. He also stated that the existing garage on the lot j should be removed whether the variance is granted or not. Mr. Corson felt that the original variance should not have been j granted being this lot is only 54' in width. ' Jim Mertes stated that they felt they would not have a problem meeting the setbacks and hardcover requirements. Goetten stated that the entire Casco Pont area is a high int.ensr- residential area. She noted that the lot size was consistent with the area although it would be one of the smallest lots. Tom Corson stated that they would be making a crowded situation even more crowded. Ile questioned the initial intent of the ordinance requiring a 100' lot width. Chairman Callahan stated that the lot was intended to provide a residence and the hardship is that there is no other adjacent property available. There were no more comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Rovegno, seconded by Goetten, to recommend renewal of the lot width and lot area variances noting that the Issues (1-7 ) and Fi^dings (1-19) , prepared by staff , were found to be sufficient. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 1. Kelley voted nay stating it would be overbuilt for lot size. #989 HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION HENDRICKSON ACCESS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC BEARING 11:40 -11:50 Hennepin County proposes dredging approximately a 20'xl26' wide corridor, removing 4.5' of lake bott.on along the edge of the Hendrickson boat ramp, and constructing a 126' long seawall along the sides of the inplace boat ramp. There were no persons present regarding this matter at. this time. Planning Commission table this matter until the December 16th meeting. #990 WARD NERREI.i, 341 1- 341 `, WATERTOWN POAD VARIANCE PUBLIC 11KAR I NC 9 : 29 - 9 : 37 Applicant requests lot area/lot width variances to construct homes on two substandard vacant commonly -owned lots adjacent to the exisiting residence at 1405 Watertown Road. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD NOVRMF - 18, 1985. PAGE. 5 #990 FERRELL continued Chairman Callahan noted that the application was incomplete absent a survey of property containing the existing house and septic site information necessary for assurance of an alternate septic site if needed. Mr. & Mrs. Ward Ferrell were present for this matter. Mr. Ferrell stated that there should be no problem with an auxi.11iary system being the lot is 3/4 acre, therefore not necessary.. Mr. Ferrell felt that a survey of the property with existing house was also not necessary. Chairman Callahan stated that this information was necessary and was requested from him last May and they would not act until this information was provided. Mr. Ferrell. stated he had a survey dated 1958 and would submit it. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated he would look at the survey and determine if it would be adequate. There were no persons present regarding this matter at this time. It was moved by Chairman Callahan, seconded by Kelley, to table this request pending complete application. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. Chairman Callahan advised applicant that they would give him their general opinions reg-rding his request although submission of the survey and septic site information may make a difference. Goetten -ted she was personnally opposed to three lots. Kelley, referring to hia statement in the Planning Commissi o:i minutes dated 4/15/85, felt that Lots 7 & 8 should be combined into one mot to allow the existing home and one other lot. Taylor and McDonald agreed with Kelley's opinion. Rovegno c.nd Callahan felt that two lots with dwellings would probably btt reasonable with the proper septic site testing, there lots would be setting precedent.. 1991 WILLIAM ULRICH 1535 BOHN'S POINT ROAD CONDITIONAh USE PERMIT PUBLIC: HEARING 9:40 - 10:37 Chairman Callahan explained the after -the -fact application for a conditional use permit and variance to do grading and filling within 75' of lakeshore. .�r From: Date: Planning Commission Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant November 13, 1985 ELL Zoning Administrators Y Cubject: #990 Ward Ferrell, 3405-3411-3415 Watertown Road Variances Application - Lot area/lot width variances to construct homes on two substandard vacant commonly -owned 'lots adjacent. to the existing residence at 3405 Watertown Road. List of Exhibit Exhibit A - Applications For 2 Vacant Lots Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey, Soils Report, Site Plan For Center Lot Exhibit E - Survey, Soils Report, Site Plan For West Lot Exhibit F - Planning Commission Minutes 4/1.5/85 Exhibit G - Council Minutes 5/28/85 Exhibit H - Notice to Applicant 5/31/85 Exhibit I - Tax History Exhibit J - Council Minutes 9/22/58 Exhibit K - Pertinent Ordinances Dating to 1950 Code Sections Pertinent Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (C) (Current code) C. The separation. by the transfer or sale of non -conforming, undeveloped lots not served by public sanitary sewer, alic;ned in a contiguous arrangement, undivided by a public or private road or road easement and under same or common ownership is not -jermitted without Council approval. Council approval is not required if the separation of sucY lots results in individual building sites that satisfy the area and width requirements of the Zoning Chapter. Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (A) (3) A. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing upon January 1, 1975 in an "R" District, which does not meet the requirements of the Zoning Chapter as to area or width may be utilized for a single family detached 'wellinq purpose provided that in the judgement of the Council h use does not adversely affect public health cr safety and the foil inq requirements are met: 3. In "R" Districts Not Served by 11uhlic Sanitary Sewer. A lot of record in any "R" District in the City not served by public sanitary sewer must meet the area and width requirements of the Zoning Chapter and shall not be ut i l i zed foi �:.ingl c, f ami i y detached dwel 1 inq purposes without Council approval. Zoning File #990 Nuvember 13, 1S85 Page 2 of 5 Per Subdivision 6, a "Lot of Record" is any lot for which a deed or registered land survey has been recorded in the office of the Registrar of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles for Hennepin County, Minnesota, prior to January 1, 1975, and after approval by the Council if required. The applicant owns four adjacent tax parcels in the RR-lB zoning district totaling 2.90 acres. The existing house, well, and septic system are contained within the two easterly parcels totaling 1.01 acres. The twc westerly parcels are 1.04 and 0.85 acres respectively. The applicant wishes to obtain building permits for each of the westerly parcels. The 1950 Zoning Code (adopted 7/10/50) established a number of zoning districts, including the "Stubbs Bay District" in which Ferrell's property was located. The "Stubbs Bay District" required minimum building lot size of one acre. This one -acre minimum was still in effect in 1958 when Ferrell requested to build a second residence on r -property. It is very likely that Ferrell was told by the City at t]. _.1me that in order to build another residence he would have to subdivide, because in general the Code allowed only one principal residence per building lot (see Council minutes 9/22/58). Note that at that time his request was referred to the Planning Commission - minutes have not been found fer the Planning Commission meeting or any subsequent action. .Although a platting code existed in Orono as of 1955, Ferrell apparently divided off 2 lots each of 140' width and approximately 1 acre in area, in or about 1959 without platting, and the parcels have apparently been separate for tax purposes since that time. The parcels including the road right-of-way would likely have been considered conforming or nearly conforming lots of record under the 1967 Zoning Code which designated the property as Zone R-1C, 1 acre and 140' width, Single Family Residential. That 1967 Code stated, re- garding lots of record, as follows: 31..200. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing upon September 14, 1967 (the effective date of the 'Zoning Code) under simile separate ownership in a "R" Residential District, which does not meet the requirements of the Zoning Code as to area or width may be utilized for a single family detaches] dwelling purpose provided that in the judgment of the Council such use does not adversely affect public health or safety. Single separate ownership includes joint ownership by not more than two persons. The 1967 Cod,_ did not discuss common ownership properties no- did it differentiate between sewered and unsewered lots of record. However, by using the term "Single Separate Ownership", it implied that other types of ownership would be treated differently but di(i not define in what way. Under this code, the applicant would like' y have t)een allowed to build on the 1.04 acre lot without. a variance because they lut met the standards of the 1-acre zoning district. Th(_. 0.85 acre Jot would likely have required Counci 1 approval, depending (-,n whethor thf arf-a in the road right-of-way was include(] in the lot arc_a at t tiat time. Zoning File #990 November 13, 1985 Page 3 of 5 The 1974 Zoning Code declared this land to be zoned RR-lB, 2 Acre Single Family Residential. As far as existing lots of record, it stated as follows: 31.201. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing upon January 1, 1975 (the effective date of the Zoning Code) under single separate ownershi in an "R" District, which does not meet the re- quirements of the Zoning Code as t-^ area or width may -,P utilized for I single family detached dwell' )urpose provided t t in the judg- ment of the Coundil such use d of adversely affe,,: public health or safety and the following req.._—ements are met: 31.203. in "R" districts of Greater Than One Acre. A lot of record in any R District in the City in excess of one acre, which does not meet the requirements of this Zoning Code as to area or width only, may be utilized for single family detached dwelling purposes if the Council finds: (1) it is at least one acre in size, and the average width of the lot is at least 100 feet; and k2) it is either served by public sanitary sewer or meets all the septic system requirements of the City or other aover.nmental body; and (3) it otherwise mets the requirements of this or other applicable ordinances. Under the 1974 Code, the Council at their option could have granted a lot area variance for a lot of single separate ownership, but the Code again dial not specifically discuss the standards for the separation of commonly owned lots. The general City policy, as evidenced by the outcome of at least one typical zoning application in 1981 was that unsewered adjacent lots owned in common could not be considered buildable and could not be separated uns.ess, each resulting lot or combination of lots included the required acreage in that zoning district. Upon recodification in .1984 the Zoning Code was amended to include the following Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (C): C. The separation by the transfer or sale of non-conformin,3, un- developed lots not served by public sanitary sewer, align-3 in a contiguous arrangement, undi,,.•ided by a public or private roar road easement and under same or common ownership is not per.mitte ti,cut Co�lnci 1 ,:approval. Council approval is not required if the se, araticn of such lots result- in individual building sA'tes that satisfy the area and width r.equ rements of tho Zoninq Chapter. Zoning File #990 November 13, 1985 Pane 4 of 5 Staff's interpretation of the current code is that the applicant would be prohibited from separating his four adjacent lots, since separation of either of the westerly lots from the main property would -exult in the creating of building sites less than two acres in area. The applicant appeared before you in April 1985 on an appeal hasis rather than a full variance application at staff's urging because a similar application had been turned down in recent years and staff wanted applicant to get general direction from the Planning Commission and Council prior to spending large dollar amounts in developing plans, septic testing, surveys, application fees, etc. The Planning Commission and Council directive to the applicant was that it is unlikely they would aprove two new houses, and perhaps would allow one new house resulting in a 1.5 acre density on the total property. Applicant nc: appears before you requesting that both westerly parcels 00 be declared buildable. Fie has provided surveys of both parcels, and has In provided soil testing and septic system designs indicating that each lot could in fact support a primary and alternate drainfield system (mounds at all sites) to serve 3-bedroom houses, given no future encroachments. The- 4 applicant has not provided a survey of the property with the existing, house, nor has he provided septic testing to prove that the property has anl' alternate site for a drainfield. These items were specifically requested in ,, "notice the of Council action" sent to the applicant on 5/31/85. Applicant,/ refuses to accept the fact that in order to grant variances to build on the two vacant lots, we also grant variances to the existing developed lot (see notice of 5/31/85). Two questions, then, need to be answered. 1. Does each lot, of and by itself, have the capability to permanently support a house, septic system, well, and the other appropriate amenities in the rural zone? If so, 2. Is the Plannin^ Commission and Council willing to set a precedent, i.e. do away with the common ownership limitation in the unsewered zone? The ramifications of Item 2 are significant. As many as 28 vacant lots in the rural unsewered zones are commonly owned with adjacent parcels and are 1/2 - 1 112 acres in area, and could expect to request the same benefit of buiidabili.ty. Many more such lots have been legally combined, which presumably denies them any status unless .re -subdivided. We saw during the appeal that the tax valuations on Ferrells adjacent parcels were lowered as of 1.983, which gives the appearance that the separated lots were then ven "accessory lot" value and not building site value, since the main: lot land value increased markedly at the same time. Perhaps this was a result of the assessor reaiizinq that the two westerly lots were not buildablr, without variances. It would appear that perhaps up until 1979 and perhaps as late as. 1982, tho extra lots were valued much the same as they m, in lot. Derrell obviously fait h,, w,,!; payinq taxes on theseas separate huildin,1 sitf-s. Zoning File #990 November 13, 1985 Page 5 of 5 A further criteria to consider is how do the lots in qu stion fit into the neighborhood as far as lot size. Given a radius of 1/2 mile from Ferrell's property, 39 developed lots are 2 acres or more, 13 are 1.25 to 2 acres, 23 are .75-1.25 acres, and ". are less than .75 acre. (These increments were picked so that the Ferrell lots could be categorized in one group.) (Note that the Stubbs Bay Study Area, where sewer is contemplated to serve Eastlake Street, Tonka Avenue, and Crestview Avenue, was excluded although it is within the 1/2 mile radius. Those 38 or so houses are on lots averaging 1/2 acre or iess.) It is clear to see that in Orroo's two acre zone north and east of Stubbs Bay, the majority of exist_ ng lots are less than two acres. In general terms, the existing density and lot sizes are detrimental to our long-term program of development without City sewers. Additional houses on relatively small lots will not help that situation. Recall tha', the Alden Anderson application tc allow a second building site on adjacent properties totaling 3.5 acres, wps in effect turned down a few years ago. Are there any circumstances or hard5hip-�: in the Ferrell application that justify a recommendation of approval? MINUTES OF THE. REGULAR ORONO COUNCII. MEETING HELD MAY 28, 1985. PAGE 4 eXA0 0 '! Acting Mayor Frahm advised Asplund that after the patios are removed, that the ground should be sodded. Councilmember L. Adams noted that he has a problem approving anything in the 0-75' setback area. Councilmember L. Adams moved, Acting Mayor Frahm seconded, tc. adopt Resolution #1768, A Resolution denying variances for the fence and patio concrete request with a deadline date for removal of patios for June 15, 1985, for 3424 Eastlake Street and July 23, 1985, for 3444 Eastlake Street and the request for deck platform and screened porch to be referred to the Planning Commission for their review. Motion, Ayes (2), Nays (1). Councilmember T. Adams voted nay. f897 CHUCK PETERSON 825 OLD LONG LAKE ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISIGN Chuck Peterson was present. Assistant Zoning Adminis- trator Gaffron stated that the surveyor reconfirmed the dry buildable area that Council requested at the last meeting. Gaffron confirmed that there is 2..0 acres of dry buildable per lot in the area identified strictly as a seasonal drainageway. Councilmember T. Adams moved, Councilmember L. Adams seconded, to approve the preliminary subdivision application of Chuck Peterson. Motion, Ayes (3), Nays (0). �#903 ARD FERREI.L WATERTOWN ROAD ZONING APPEAL, Mr. and Mrs. Ward Ferrell were present. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicant was brought in under a zoning appeal in order to save the applicant some money. Gaffron explained that if the applicant had applied for a variance that the application would be more costly and with the Council's past precedents the Council would probably have denied the application. C.i.ty Attorney Radio askeu how much the full variance application would have cost. Radio noted that by allowing this applicant the appeals procedure the City is saving the applicant. money, but by handling this matter the City is not treating this application as a variance and not using the same standards. Radio noted that the decision reached tonight does not presume that the same decision would be reached on a formal variance application. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that the variance application we ul,' I)e $150, plus the applicant's expense fur additional surveylnq work, plus the extra expense for septic test : for each .lot.. Gaffron es t.1mated MINUTES OF THE REGUI.All ORONO COUNCII. MEETING HELD MAY 28, 1985. PAGE 5 #903 FERRELL that the application could have cost the applicant $1,OOC just to get denied. Gaf f ron noted that staf f f elt that the applicant could get some general direction from the City under the zoning appeals application process. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the Alden Anderson application is very similar to this Ferrell application. Gaffron explained that the applicant owns four adjacent tax parcels totaling 2.90 acres. Gaffron noted that the applicant wishes to obtain a building permit for the 1.04 acre lot. Ward Ferrell stated that he has owned the land since 1948 and built the existing home in 1958. Ferrell stated that he bought and has saved this land with the intent to build his retirement home. Ferrell stated that Herb Ross (former Orono Mayor) had requested him to divide his property. Ferrell stated that as a favor to Ross and the City and to stop trouble in the future, he divided the property into four parcels. Ferrell stated that then tl—� zoning changed in 1967 and at the time the hearing was held regarding this zoning change, he asked whether it would affect existing lots and he was told no by the City. Ferrell noted 41-11,at he is willing a parcel of land for his daughter to build on. Ferrell stated that in 1980 the Stubbs Bay Marina was divided and the City allowed very small lots. Ferrell felt that he should receive the same treatment that Stubbs Bay Marina had received. Acting Mayor Frahm explained that the City agreed to smaller lots in the Stubbs Bay Marina because the City felt that it would be a less intense use on the property with residential units rather than the intense use of the commercial marina. Frahm stated that there were very extenuating circumstances with the Stubbs Bay Marina and shouldn't be used to compare with this application since the circumstances were significantly different. Ward Ferrell asked if the City was going to honor what Herb Ross requested. Ferrell stated that Ross told him to contact George Hanson (former assessor for Orono) to see what the lot sizes should be when he was subdividing the property. Ferrell stated that Hanson told him 140' width for each lot.. Acting Mayor asked staff what the typical lot size is in the neighborhood. Ward Ferrell stated that the average lot size is one acre and only one parcel is two acres. Councilmember T. Adams asked how many units the applicant is requesting out of a total of 2.9 acres. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron answered that the applicant is requesting a total of three building sites (one existing, cane for t.htr rc,t irement home, ene for his daughter) . MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCII. MEETING HELD MAY 28, 1985. PAGE 6 #903 FERRELL Zoning Administrator standards changed when the applicant. Mabusth noted that in 1967 the the zoning code was revised effecting Acting Mayor Frahm explained that it is hard for the City to honor a verbal opinion that was made :in 1967. Frahm felt to be fair to the applicant that he would consider tWO building sites, but certainly not three building site-,. Councilmember T. Adams stated that before deciding the Council should see all relevant backgroune information. Councilmember L. Adams symphathized with this type of problem when the owner purchases property -and keeps it with the intent in the future to build on the property only to have the zoning code standards change. Adams stated that he cannot see installing three septic tank systems on three small lots since the septic tanks will be the permanent systew installed there. Adams noted conceptually that he would consider two building sites only because of the problem that the applicant owned the property with the intent to build in the future only to have the zoning code standards change. Adams noted that if it weren't for that yeas-n he would not even consider two building sites. Adams sated that when the septic systems are placed too close together on small lots such a�; these, there are potential problems with ground water contamination when these systems fail. Acting Mayor Frahm expressed his concern that if the City approved three lots that the City %.ould create a density pocket similar to the Crystal Bay neighborhood in which the City would have to go back in the future to correct the problem by sewering the area. Ward Ferrell stated tha his septic system is 28 years old and has never had a problem with leakage. Ferrell pointed out that he has paid taxes on the property as if they were buildable lots sine 1948 and now he cannot use the property. Ferrell stated that up until two years ago they paid taxes on the two vacant lots as if there were separate building sites. Ferrell noted that two years ago the taxes were lowered from $11,000 to $5,500. Ferrell explained that he has already told his daughter that she can have the lot and he is r.ot going back on his word. Ferrell asked if the City was going to honor what herb Ross told him years ago. Acting Mayor Frahm stated, in his opinion, no. Mrs. Ferrell asked if the City was going to refund their taxes that they have paid for buildi+'_)le lots all these years. City Administrator Bernhar(son stated that should a variance be applied for that in the review it should be considered what position the applicant. would have been in if he had not subdivided the property. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 28, 3.985. PAGE 7 #903 FERRELL Councilmember L. Adams gave his opinion should the applicant apply for a variance, he would be willing to consider a total of two lots. Councilmember L. Adams moved, Councilmember T. Adams seconded, to affirm the staf f ' s interpretation of the zoning code. Motion, Ayes (3), Nays (0). #908 6 #924 JON SCHERVEN 2649 CASCO POINT RD (#908) VARIANCE - RESOLUTION (#924)'CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION Jon Scherven was present with ha.s father A.W. Scherven. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that the applicant proposes to build a two story addition over the existing concrete slab and deck on the lake side of his parents home. Gaffron noted that the applicant proposes hardcover tradeoffs, and that the proposed deck does extend into the 75' setback zone. Gaffron stated that the conditional use permit is required because the applicant is requesting to use the: basement as a guest apartment for his parents who are retiring. Gaffron noted that applicant does propose a kitchen in the basement but has agreed that the second dwelling unit would never be rented out. Gaffron noted the Planning Commission did approve the application subject to the following regarding the guest apartment use: 1 ) apartment for use of family members only; 2 ) apartment use may not be conveyed to a purchaser; 3 ) guest apartment may not be rented out and such to be confirmed by staff yearly; 4 ) use is subject to City review at end of four years. Acting Mayor Frahm asked if 4 separate entrance is proposed for the guest apartment use. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that the main entrance would be used, but that once inside *he main entrance, a door leading to the basement and a door leading to the upstairs is proposed. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that the Council did recently approve the Beek conditional use permit which is similar to this application. Councilmember L. Adams felt that the lot is really too small to support another dwelling unit. Jon Scherven explained that his parents have tried to sell the home and have not been able to. Scherven stated that he has of fered to buy the home, remodel it, and then they would be able to live in the basement. Scherven confirmed that he will agree to any stipulations the Council wishes to place on the: guest apartment use. MINUTES OF THE RFGUT.AR ORONO COUNCII. MEETING FIELD MAY 13, 1985 PAGE 11 (=�ARD FERREI,L V(14 4 3405 WATERTOWN ROAD S-/ ZONING APPEALS Ward Ferrell was not present. Building & 'Zoning Administrator Mabusthnoted that the applicant has requested that the application be tabled until May 28, 1985. Mayor. Butler moved, Councilmember Frahm seconded, to table the Ferrell application until May 28, 1985. Moticn, Ayes (5), Nays (0). #905 DENNIS THOMPSON 250 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION #1757 Dennis Thompson was not present. Councilmember Frahm moved, Councilmember L. Adams seconded, to adopt Resolution #1757, A Resolution Approving A Conditional Use Permit to allow a guest house apartment. Motion, Ayes (5), Nays (0). #907 JAMES BIGHAM 1545 LONG LAKE BLVD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #1758 James Bigham was present. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron reviewed with the Council the applicants proposal to construct an addition to his home. Gaffron noted that the applicant replaced his septic system in November, 1984. Gaffron stated that no alternate drainfield site existE on the property and that if the new system fails a holding tank would have to be installed. Gaffron noted that with Bighams proposal a future 8 member family could move into the home and the --urrent septic system might not be able to handle such an intense use. Gaffron noted that Bigham has not met some of the requirements in Resolution 101600 regardit g drainage and retaining walls. James Bigham stated that the requirements could not be met because of the weather and the frozen ground. Bigham stated that he will fulfill the requirements as soon as possible. ^ni7n.ri lmnmher Frahm stated that there is a drainage problem on the property already. Frahm expressed concern for adding on additional hardcover and noted that the septic system cannot handle any future family larger than Bighams. James Bigham explained that the drainage problem does not come from his lot and that the drainage problem is caused by the lots across the street. Bigham rioted that his lot serves as a drainage spot fox others runof f . Bigham addressed the septic issue by noting that he could replace his septic system if needed in the same lc cation as the septic system is currently located. Bigham rc;ed if that does not work, then holding tanks would be installed. Bigham noted that he doesn't minis holding tank:: anti stated that he felt the whole neighbor11iocid eventually will be on holding tariks. To: Orono Councii Members From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator Date: April 30, 1985 Subject: #903 Ward P. Ferrell, 3405 Watertown Road - Zoning Code Interpretation •�711 List of Exhibits pf Exhibit A - Application 'A�� Exhibit B - Property Owners List B� p�E •����, Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Proposed Site Plan Exhibit F - Staff Sketch of Lot Areas Exhibit 11 - Staff Letter to Applicant 2/27/85 Exhibit. I - Draft Resolution From Alden Anderson (Application 4635) Exhibit J - Tax History Exhibit K - Minutes From Planning Commission Meeting 4/15/85 Exhibit L - Staff. Memo to Planning Commission 4/8/85 The applicant owns four adjacent tax parcels in the RR-lB zoning district totaling 2.90 acres. The existing house, well, and septic system are contained within the two easterly parcels totaling 1.01 acres. The two westerly parcels are 1.04 and 0.95 acres respectively. The applicant wishes to obtain a building permit for the 1.04 acre lot. In staff's preliminary review of this req..,est by the appli- cant, it was clear that the application was nearly indentical to the request of Alden Anderson on Shoreline Drive in 1981, which was effectively denied before it was withdrawn. Based on the Alden Anderson denial, staff felt Ccuncil would likely not grant a variance for the Ferrel' application. Rather than force the applicant to spend extrem.,2 amounts of money for the full variance application, soil testing, survey work, etc. only to be denied, staff felt obligated to advise the applicant to submit a zoning appeal application with $100.00 fee. Please review my memo to Plannina Commissir )f 4/8/85 and the Planning Commission minutes, and the exhibits. Mote that the informal consensus of the Planning Commission was that at most the applicant might be allowed one building site by combininq Lots 7 and 8 for a total of 1.89 acres, leavinq the existing house on 1.01 acres. Please advise the applicant whether or not yuu will consider grantinq a variance to the rural common ownership section of the coca e . 1 Jr x" �. MINUTL:S OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD APRIL 15, 1.985 P1: 3 #895 T.M. CROSIIY Approval is subject to the following condition"s:��� 1. PID 11-117-23 32 0004 and northern portion of rearranged PID 11-117-23 32 0005 to be r,7bined with Crosby homestead lot. 2. PID 11-117-23 32 0006 and southern portion of rearranged PID 11-117-23 32 0005 to be legally combined for tax purposes. 3. All future construction on undeveloped lot that involves the alteration of f lood plain fringe areas must be reviewed and approved by the DNR before a building permit can be issued by the City of Orono. 4. Tested septic site area on undeveloped lot must be staked and protected prior to construction. Notion, Ayes (6), Nays (0). #903 WARD FERRELL 3405 WATERTOWN ROAD REQUEST TO CONFIRM INTERPRETATION OF ZONING CODE PUBLIC HEARING, 8:10-8:49 PM and and Nary Ferrell were present. Chairman Callahan announced that now was the time and place for the public hFiring to be held concerning ward Ferrell's application to confirm the staffs interpretation of the zoning code. There was no one present from the public for this application. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted the certificate of mailing and the affidavit of publication. Ward Ferrell explained that in 1948 they bought the property en Watertown Road. Ferrel stated that in 1958 they decided to divide the property -o build a new home. Ferrell stated that he was informed by staff at that time that he had to appear before the Council. Ferrell stated that everyone agreed on the Council, except one pens,- Ferrell stated that this property was divided at the pr ous Mayor's (Herb Ross) request. Ferrell agreed and he met the zoning at that time and noted that he could have had 5 lots but chose four lots to make bigger lots. Ferrell explained that the surrounf'ing lots are all the same size. Ferrell stated that the zoning has since changed. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron reviewed with the Planning Commission that in 1967 this area uas zoned I -acre. Caffron statc_(I that from 1 967--1975, Ferrell could have built on those lct without Gaffron noted that in 1975 t h v are.+ wa! rc •r.ont.,0 to :' a c i Gaffrc>n explained that in a s irrri Iar case- on Shout° l i f:e lir i vr,, the, Council denied the .tpplic-,+nt tfit- vat giving tlie City a clear policy in the corilmorp ( 1wno, rsh)E) i!,f;uc with,ii the rural areas of Orono. Gaffron reviewed with the Planning Commission the tax MYNU'i'ES OI' 1111F ORONO i'I.ANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD APRIL 15, 1985 PAGI 4 #903 WARD FERRELL Rovegno noted that for 20 years it has been taxed as a separate buildable site and for the past 3 years it has not been taxed as a buildable site. Ward Ferrell stated that he has kept the property all these years thinking he could build on each parcel and he noted he would like to build his retirement home on one of the parcels. Ferrell noted he has owned the property since 1950 and is entitled to build. Planning Commission agreed with staff 's interpretation of the zoning code that the property needs a variance. Chairman Callahan suggested that the Planning Commission be polled as to their feeling on the application if it were an actual variance request.. Kelley felt that Lots 7 and 8 should :)e combined into one lot, thereby only allowing two lots [the existing lot with the existing home and one other lot (7 6 8 combined)]. Mary Ferrell stated that the code is not consistent and is contrac:ictory in that tie zoning has changed along with the code over the years. Sime felt that there is very little doubt that staff int-rprPted tt e zoning code correctly, but whether he agrees wit.i the :^ premise is another point. Sime felt that these are a L.. of rights that go with the land and should not be take n aw,_. , people by changing the rules or zoning while the, still u. land. Sime stated that the common cwnershiF:• issue seems alter the rules for ,people. Most of the Planning Commis. -in felt they could only approved two lots [the existing lot ,pith the a isting home and one other lot) conditioned upon Lots 7 and 8 being combined. Chairman Callahan closed the public hearing at 8:49 p.m. Rovegno moved, Sime seconded, to confirm staff s interpretation of the zoning code that these lots do need variances,. Motion, Ayes (6), Nays (0). Rovegno felt that a less intense use of the property would be more reasonable by combining Lot 7 and 8 and that way the applicants would only need a lot area variance and not a lot width variance. Zoning Administrator Mabusth state:] that this application was brought in under a request to confirm the interpretation of the zoning code in order to save the applicants money. Mabusth noted that a completed application would require payment for area variances for each proposed and existing building site in addition to septic testing for each undeveloped site and an alternate test site for existing MI`NU'I'ES OF 'yJIE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MI"ETING HELD APRII! 15, 1985 PAGE 5 house. Mabusth noted tha± staf f concluded that in 1 i ght of. Council's recent amendment of the zoning code dealing with rural lots under common ownership and their decision on the Shoreline Drive property of Alden Anderson, that this approach was the most inexpensive way to get an answer for the applicant. #905 DENNIS THOMPSON 250 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 8:50 - 8:51 PM Dennis Thompson was not present. Chairman Cal lahanannounced that now was the time and place for a public hearing concerning Dennis Thompson's conditional use permit application. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted the certificate of mailing and the affidavit of publication. There was no one present in the audience fcr this application. Chairman Callahan.closed the public hearing at 8:51 p.m. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that during construction on the Thompson home, staff noted a second kitchen arid a separate apartment area being constructed and felt that a conditional use permit should be applied for. Mabusth stated -.i Thompson has agreed that the guest apartment will r:.ver be rented out. Kelley moved, Sime seconded, to recommend apprcval of a co, diti- .al use rermit for the guest apartment within the rebiat. Located at 250 Old Crystal Bay Road finding all_ standarL or Section. 10-?'�, Subdivision 3(G) to be statisfied subject to t' •ondition tha` the separate apartment unit may ne 'er L. ted. Motion, Ayes (6) , Nays ;0). #907 JAMES 3IGIiAM 1545 LONG LAKE BLVD VARIt-NCE PUBLIC IIEAR1NG 8:52 - 9:12 PM James Bigham was present. Chairman Callahan a..ncunced that now was the time and place for the public hearing concerning James Bigham's variance request. There was no one present from the audience for this application. Assistant Zoninc Administrator Gaffron nc~ed the certificate of Pa ng and the affidavit of publication. r15SiStant Zorr i Adminis:t.rator Caffron explained that the applicant is r Iuesting a variance to construct an ac'dition to is home wit h will increase the Ilardcover in both : 75' an( i5-2'.:"' sa t 1: zonc:f-•. Gaffror, stated th•,t the add will inc potential water usage since they p construct it 1"COI :ulrl. G:�ffton notc�;i that i?igham rcFlac� septic sy!�tvm n Nnvemhc r of 19b4, ►,lzt that ti:trc <3 alternate dra,..! `;, ;ci � iter: can the preFert.y and nsuw nynt-c l f,!1 - "L( i—int. arld It ('Gl:ld i.ot. I'! a To: Planning Commission Members CAR O�L . s - It From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator Date: April 8, 1985 Subject: #903 Ward P. Ferrell, 3405 Watertown Road - Interpretation of zoning code regarding the buidability of substandard commonly -owned lots in the RR-lB un- sewered zoning district. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Proposed Site Plan Exhibit F - Staff Sketch of Lot Are ..ids Exhibit H . - Staff Letter to Applicant 2/27/85 Exhibit I - Draft Resolution From Alden Anderson (Application #635) Exhibit J - Tax History The applicant owns four adjacent tax parcels in the RR-lB zoning district totaling 2.90 acres. The existing house, well, and septic system are contained within the two easterly parcels totaling 1.01 acres. The two westerly parcels are 1.04 and 0.85 acres respectively. , The applicant wishes to obtain a building permit for the 1.04 acre lc . Mr. Ferrell became owner of all four parcels pri.or to the 1967 zoning code. The 1967 Code declared the land in question as Zone R-lC, 1 Acre Single Family Residential. That 1967 Code stated, regarding lots of record, as follows: 31.200. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing upon Sept. 14, 1967 (the effective date o'_ the Zoning Code) under single separate ownership in a "R" Residential District, which does not meet the requirements of the Zoning Code as to area or width ic.ay be utilized for a single family detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgement of the Council such use does not adversely affect public health or safety. Single separate own,-?rships includes joint owner- ship by not more than two persons. The 1967 Code did not discuss common ownership properties nor did it differentiate between sewered and unsewered lots of record. Under this code, the applicant would likely have been allowed to build on the lot in question without a variance be- cause the lot met the standards of the 1 acre zoning district. The 1974 Zoning Code declared H-.1s land to be zoned RR-lB, 2 Acre Single Family Residential. As far as existing lots of record, it stater: as follows: 31.201. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing upon January 1, 1975 (the effective date of the Zoning Code) under single separate ownership in an "R" District, which does nab meet t-h6 requirements of the Zoning Code as to area or width may be utilized for a single family detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgment of the Council such use does not adversely affect public health or safety and the following requirements are met: 31.203. In "R" districts of Greater Than One Acre. A lot cf record in any "R" District in t,ie City in excess of one acre, which does not meet the requirements of this Zoning Cede as to area or width only, may be utilized for single family detached dwelling purposes if the Council finds: (1) it is at least one acre in size, and the average width of the lot is at .least 100 feet; and ( 2 ) it is either served by public sanitary sewer or meets all the septic system requirements of the City or other governmental body; and (3) it otherwise meets the requirements of this or other applicable ordinances. Under the 1974 Code, the Council at their option could have granted a lot area variance for a lot in single separate owner- ship, but the Code again did not specifically discuss the stan- dards for the separation of commonly owned lots. The general C.ty policy, as evidenced by t_'e_outcome of at least one typical zoning application in 1981 was that unsewered adjacent lots owned in common could not be cGnsidered buildable and could not b,� separated unless each resulting lot or combination of lots in- cluded the required acreage in that zoning district. Upon recodification in 1984 the Zoning Code was amended to include the following Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (C): tP.\ C. The separation by the transfer or sale of non-conform- 4/ ing, undeveloped lots not served by public sanitary sewer, 4 � aligned in a contiguous arrangement, undivided by a public 01 _2rivate read or road easement and under same or common ownersFi�p a✓required if the separation of such lots results in individual buildin.; _b that Eatisfy the area and width requirements of the Zoning Chapter. Staff's interpretation of the current code is that the u applicant would be prohibited from separating his four adjacent lots. since separation of either of the westerly lots from the main property would result in the creating of building sites less than two acres in areP. 2 Staff has told the applicant on numerous occasions over recent years that it is unlikely the City would allow building permits for his adjacent parcels. A similar application by Alden Anderson at 1900 Shoreline Drive resulted in Council voting 4-0 to deny separation of adjacent 1.4 acre and 1.8 acre commonly owned parcels from each other, based on 1) lack of demonstrated hardship; 2) no sanitary sewer available; 3) insufficient area; 4) insufficient width. I have included the draft resolution from this application, which should help to clarify the City's past position on applications of this type (note that the Anderson resolution was never adopted because he withdrew his application after Council voted to have staff draft a denial resolution). I have included the tax history for 1.974-1985 on the properties (see Exhibit J). It is noteworthy that the valuation of the parcel in question (P.I.D. 0007) was reduced starting in 1983, and the parcel was assessed incrementally as compared to the parcel with the house; i.e, the adjacent parcels appear to be valued as part of the main lot, not as separate bui lding sites. Because Mr. Ferrell insisted on bringing this application to you even though he was told of the slirr, chances for approval, staff accepted the application on an appeal/interpretation basis. Does the Planning Commission find any hardship or circumstance that would suggest the standards should not apply to this property? IL (ATV of ORONO Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota 553236 Municipal offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka February 27, 1985 Ward Ferrell 3405 11atertown Road Long hake, MN 55356 Re: Variance Application Dear Mr. Ferrell: As we discussed over the phone, based on the zoning code require- ments and the results of a similar application a few years ago, I feel there is little chance your proposal would be approve%:. I am sending copies of the pertinent code sections dealing with existing lots of record. In regards to the Stubbs Bay i•,... ._na _property division you referred to, this was previously zoned E 2 commercial an' the 3 lot subdivision was arrived at only after intensive study and deliberation by the City. In a nutshell, the 3 residential lots of about 1/2 acre ea-h were found to create a much less intensive use of the lake than the ilarina. This would appear to be a unique situation and not really rested to your application. As I see it you have two options if you wish to proceed with your proposal: a) Go ahead with the application for a variance of lot area and lot width; application fee $200.00 plus $40.00 refundable land use application sign depc,sit. or b) File a zoning appeal, i.e. an appeal. of the Zoning Adminis- trate interpretation of the zoning code; application fee $100.00. It would be your responsibility to explain to the Planning Commission why the code should not apply in your situation. The deadline for information to be submitted for the April 15 Planning Commission meeting is March 21st.. Please contact me if you hzive further questions. Sincerely, Micha.1 F'. Gaffron, AssistArit :,oning Admi.nitrator N( It U1��. A !( �t1(. J' 1 ? lti t • AD'11%1% I k A 11o% A I IN AK1 1'3 73SK • Pt BI I( NUNA1 J't I"+ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional project) After -the -Fact Fees (Additional $50.00 payment per each project) --------- -------- -------------------------------------- ----- --------�- - PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ��o/%1'�l"CC�Y��`� IL�Z��i'35�/� > 5-1r( - b--) Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Please check one -- Is the property _x abstract or torrens? Please attach legal description to application if not included on required - survey. ------------------ ;--------------------------------------------- — -- - � APPLICANT�5 Name /�/' ��if�}� L� Phone 411 a " 0! ; Mailing Address -------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER NamehAm/xz—Z-2,—&- Phone Mailing Address .1 zi,4 ��/%/�i/dT_,(fi��yL✓1,/f�G,� Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) also'own the adjacent parcels of land. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of. Property ��/'/" Residential Other (specify) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Ccst $` f7`7 Describe request in detai 1 VARIANCES REQUIRED r � ot! Area / Lot. Width Hardcover - Setback Variances (I ront Sick Rear) Other _ �;, • �" (0VER HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: ---------------------------------•----------------------------------------- REQUTAED SUBMITTALS 1,' Completed Application Form. 2.v Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes ( #10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4." Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. d Plat Map. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to payallfeesand/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this appl ication, and certifies that the information sLpplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. r � Applicant's signature Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and farther authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission membern, and Council members for purposes, of investigation and verification of this request:. c Owner's sic;;iatur4, D a t e Applicant must, hove all sul,mittals intc! the, City cifficcs 25 clays before the F'lanninq Commi �::;ioi, hii i•t i nq. P]anni ny Com!*ji SsiCl: I Mf (,t: inc;s are held on thcr third Monday of E,ach nu:nt h. Flat of Survey for Ward P. Ferr"ll in the SE lA of Se,-t ion 32, T1131i, ti23W Certificate of Survey: I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of all that part of the Southeast quarter of :section 32, T118N, R23W, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South lino of said South- east quarter, 1228 feet hest of the South- east corner thereof; th"r.c,� west along said !youth line 140 feet; ttjance ;.crth at right angles to said South line to the public road; thence Southeasterly along said road to its inters�ctior. with a line drawn Borth through the point of beginning at right angles to the South lip.^ of said ::ouLhsast quarter; th"jicP .;outh to the point of beginninF•; and of the location of all buildings thej,•eon, and till visible encrohchments, if any, from or on $• `. land. - - - __ .4 Wj Wm. Kelley, Jr, ZI i-nF . No. 1342 Bruce E. Kelley i Fq-. No. 5713 Gordon A. Coffin :PF. ho. 6064 K .LLrY rc Kr.LL,:Y, '-.ngin,-ers Long Lake, Virnesota Y januLry o lron marker e ( __,``_ _lR COrR.r O\ st' l4. ,L 11e z3' 1 hereby rcr ' b tt this survey. plan, or report wa: prep-irt-d by me or under III)* direct super• vi.>ion and that 1 am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under (lie laws of the State of Mina. esota. MOM Is (a- 17 /If("y 49000 325 zBoo RD 40 150 44 43 v � M • i Yt tr A� -� `A, DM I((r It„) rw,a( T'vS1.1I Nov M1hnnrJ6101.2 . _ orl ll((NPA ()rt the, hf)r,' of �.Q�.r' .�it•t►1 'InJlitR Uctober 26, 1981 a Ward Ferrell 3405 Watertown Road Long Lake, :21 35356 Dear Mr. Ferrell: I have received I•our recent letter to the City concerning the lots you own on Watertown Road. First, let me apologize for n-t having tiim, to answer your questions sooner. As I understand the problem, you own three separate tax parcels, or lots, on Watertown Road. Your borne is on the eastern parcel with the next two parcels being the open yard area west of your hope. You now wish to sell one or both of the other parcels for another building site. We measure the parcel with your home as about .06 acre in area, the next parcel as .82 acre, and the western parcel as 1.04 acre, all exclusive of road right of way. This totals 2.72 acres. The zoning in your area since 1975 h`-is required at least 2.0 acres of la' - each house. This is because there is no City sewer avail it each house must maintain its own septic system. Your U r.cels together now comprise one ccnforming lot. If a.ay parcels were to be sold off, none would meet the minis,urn ea including the one with your home. Lecause tr, . lots would be 1CS3 than the minimum area required, the City would not issue permits for any new house, whether you own the lots or if you sold one. There woulrl be no basis for the City to grant a variance to the zoning area requirement!,. The only option would be a gcneral area -wide rezoning. I must tall you that ,;uco a prospect is vary, very unlikely. I know this is not t.hc an ,wor you were looking for. Things do chant'^ as the yearn pass. If you wish t(-.) discuns it further, 8111UIS1,0i11�141. {"11)� • AI}`t{ {`:, 4 S?'•�` ♦'r e.. n F1 H l'.`.t Ski N � , ward Ferrell Palle 2 you are always welcome to call me or Jeanne Mabusth, the Zoning Administrator. Sincerely, Alan P. Olson City Planner cc: City Council Walter R. Benson Jeanne A. Mabusth 5cptrober 79, 1981 City of Orono Orono, Minnesota 55391 Or., t, .�E 001110 4 f W, lerl .t the sunder of 1958, 1 vent to aei "+.r -►:, i'snisen to F•et a ' :i Lding parent. At t1.at t ir,e 1 vas i r.,, .' chat : had to ere the Council for n;,provnl. At the ne•., ntinp I approached the Council for approval. I expinined that _ had ©bout. five (5) acres of land and I wanted to Guild at the east end of trio land. Herb Rnns, then Mnvor, knew the prr•)erty and nade a t,ntion to approve the pe..tnit. A second . ion van about to be nade when Mr. Bugley q .eet ic.ned t: c let;. I . _y of t ) hour.1 on the zene property, He said tv,o nouces on a lot of a ouu-divi- sion vas not legal. I expin;ned tt•at ther,z w-itn't any iivi.air• of property and that the hori,ee would be er len•t 40C t apart. I already hnu rac,rt, +age .,p-rov..._ f:,,_ dwent ..eras for on i _reace ir, rt,e exist% r,rt gage "tie apprcval vas '.abled until le;-ii Ad•. -ice -oul obt+ined rod the Vi1:age lawyer. 1 waited a!• uP two sor,the -he results tnat never , +Ame even when I naked what war I called Herb Rosa -.r work early o^e Saturday ■orn. ► d hi© I couldn't '.it longer because of winter coming and ing to .tart construction that d"y. %bout two weehe later ►' rh called and t up in and bet a building persi.. It '+',ally :ovtd. ..t that t+1e he exprerseo hie wish th-1 dividing the lar•1 to +atilt. Council se0be .►cful legal tangle. I said I would think it ov When t vent to Be- 'eo-ga Hansen I in•, ' : r- ee abut reetri::to!ra c t rt'vided the It -d. N. info%aef se r ao rest% c ►o• .._., Snt exg deair.- ►.. it at lar. ;t•t vL ,,e buil site. 1.6,.tng 1 f tt of land on thr auuth would have given me 5 or 6 lot+. I .--ider to div=ue the land and contscri Cordun Coffin ►Jt urvey Pihdinr 5 or 6 lot* not appealiag to se, I suttled for -* lots. 1 - 150 feet ''0 feet, and the third I left .63 fet•t for eAlf T h i a W a a a. .eptea by the Village a -id Eerb thenl.e,4 c, t ,y conperat ion with thetr ren• .t cir.y ,f Cuomo -1- September 21, 19H1 When ne%- xenin,g,, atarted ant' nr-etinen were held for pu'.,lic rreponhe, thr quc:ation vat rained ahc,-jt e.xistir,F lots (? - 1,0 ft.,. W,� were informed chnt it would not afftct existirF lots and had ccothinr to worry tthout. I decided to .,ell a lot and found .*buyer. That pnrty (1 war: inforcre went 'o the City Hall to ; information on Luilding rr•arrictiona and code end was inforaea ..nut a permit would not br insuc.d under any :ircunstanceo becauaa of tt:e lot size (1.15 acr-s). I van told that it would be a weste of tine even to eppro9ch the Plnnning Board for a.proval. This wnn trAd 'n me over the by 1CA&I at the City I1011, It sc.nn strange that after a request ay one Council to divi,le Lund to oatiafy the 'rilinge and Coun.,il -)enbers, to hnve state-nents made that exis'. ng lotr, would not be affected by new coning coder, that now a buyer of a Int in told impo-isible to ��uild on this lot: in Orono. I would r,rte to hell thin lot. The buyer wants to live in Orono I.L. dis_ oraged by the flat by the City for permit %tithvut any ex pt. ionu. I would ltke this aettlid :o land can be gold. I have paid taxea on thin land since 1949 and expenses to keep it clean. Thin amounts to quire a sum of monk.-y and ti^:. 1hr, hear it can't be used in quite a blow. people of the Planning Committee, Council membpra and nbe Work for the City work for the improverient of the :y ee Orono. Wr iave lenA (lots) already plotted but do n�at et new codes. V opie v t to buy in Orono to live here. hese lots should be appr, eJ for building, tiew people develop more iobn - ioprovenent brings more revenue for the City. -his in `1elps the Ci.ry improve service to the conourity. Let'r not hinder rorrIn.1a, et'c get new citizena in Orono - to cove forward let's improve nd drv4Aop what we have. Rerspertfully curs, ��/J f ONO - ORDINANCE IQO. 22 An Ordinance to Preserve - Public Health of the Citize: . of Orono by Regulating the it-a.i- mum Size of Residential Build- ing LiAs WHEREP 5, the Village of Or- ono has ziu community sewn-, system and depe:tds upon sep tanks and soil absorption tems, for the disp')sal of wasL.,:; and WHEREAS, such disposal methods are apt to create a ser- ious problem affecting the health of the comint-pity whe: a applied in residential areas serv:ns more than one dwelling per acre; and WHEREAS, other communities have serious health problems by reason of the enlargement of res- idential areas with substandard lot sizes served by septic tanks and absorption systems; and WHEREAS, the Planning "i,jm- mission of the Village of Orono has recommended to the Council that regulations should be estab- lished now to prevent the same sort of serious health problem from arising in the Village of Orono; NOW, THEREFORE, for the sake of the general welfare and health of the residents of the Village of Orono, it is ordained as fol'ows: S'ct'on 1. After the effective dat^ of this ordinance, no build- ing permit shall be issued for the erection of a residence in any residential zone of the Village, except upon a building lot con- taining a minirrum area o'' ~re acre, and having a mil m width ,0 feet at the b_ if' line. Section 2. It is recognized th::: there are sc rr:;l built up resi- dential areas in t e Viaage whi,.h are i.1zbstandard and overbuilt t,y the r-rr.s of this ordinance. 'n F U C t;uilciing pertnits may ")e ee for Ili- • not meeting the tniT ;mum rcqu,..• n.rr!- est:,h- list .A by t.hi:. ordinincT_ if the Vi J.:•^.e Cour:cil f('; til-I !'u.: bLddin, tk ill con: r;ii to the rr:1- era char._Aeri tip.- )f the nci" 1- ecJ . A... 3 borhod and will not have an im- mediate and specific adverse effect upon the public health. Section 3. It is recognized that •-� the enforcement of the .ninimum provisions required by this ordin- ance with respect to lots held in single, separate ownership at the u't ne`of t'TI•e passaj;e o tb s ordin- ance might be an arbitrary depri- vation of a valuable right from said owners. Therefore, where a lot which fails to meet the mini- mum standards of this ordinance is held in a single, separate own- ership at the time of the pas- sage of this ordinance, the Coun- cil may issue a building permit, provided that there will be no immediate or specific adverse ef- fect, upon the public health. Section 4. This ordinance su- percedes and repeals any provi- sions in the platting ordinance or zonin; ordinances of the Village wh;.ch are inconsistent herewith, except that provisions of prior ordinances establishing higher standards than those prescrib ' by this ordinance are contin in effect. Section 5. It is recognized that the c.tablishrn,:-nt of definite standards for all lots in the entire Village is impossible, as there may be, in every case, reasons to relax the standards, or to en- force stricter standards. The Council reserves its discretion to increase or decrease the stand- ards hereby set for good cause, whenever the particulLr facts of the situation convince the Coun- cil that the public welfare, and particularly the public health, rc— quire such modification. Section 6. This ordinance shall be published in the Minnetonka Herald at Wayzata, Minnesota. and shall be effective immediate - upon such publication. Fassed by the Village Coilneil r,f the Vilage of Orono this 12th clay of October, 1959, by a vote f 4 y(as and No nays. 11. R. ROSS, rrlayor :%t; O. F. JC)nNSON, Clerk (10-15-59) VI.LLAGE OF Onor'10 _ RUSIDENTIAL JWD COMMERCII „ BUILDINGS Pt1RP03E OF PUILDING �~ OWNI-.It "i/,j ex ���> r�. � � /_• BUILDER _/q.l:i ADDRCS3 /� L E /� L �.. ,c' ADDRrSS PHONE NO. G ,'? 3 r' ? G 9-_ PHONE NO. PERMIT NO. 2,�7-_ :. No. Parcel No. ifol, lueck. _ Adc'idon or Subdivision ii.71n DE: CPZM0 1 BUILDING LOCATION Size of Lot Dis. From Road Land Sq. Ft. Dim. Sides Elevation Dis. Back Drainage CONSTRUCTION Frame / Brick, Solid Stucco Brick Veneer Stono Cement Block FOOTINGS Depth .. Least Depth Width i Below Grado IPOU14DATIOII Con-1"'cNon '- ' Size - BA SEI. ..1T Ground Drainage Floor Iic:caing Posu Size Spacing Beams Size Span CHIM11EYS No. Type N4 , Foundation - Huight Above Ro. I Smcke Pipe — DL:tance From Joists FLOOF.3 Sub Flooring j laists I Size Z x ! ) Spacing / �# Bridging S' I isr.ogd,D• 31%s 40 Q. 1 y / iA— _ . ' >STUDD> &Arltit/ CEILIINO JOISTS Si a f- " / / am '_ 7 &,/ Size � ' Spocung '' spacing "Paculg Pl7t4 ■ / ► slimI Longest Span C.II� Bawment — No. Size Stairway 181 FkKW — No. Size Stairway HISULATION Ceiling / - 1 Wags VENTILA110M AND ZIGIiT Percentage of Fk �r Area Vent. Percentage of Light to fl•»r Area LINTLLS Size '•_ y gp= Locavon WELL TYPE I Conrtruction ?'� 1. Location SEPTIC TAKES Sim .�-- - Distance From Well Construction t �•TtT: Depth Distance From Well S Z Width Distanco From Lot Liam/•' >< Length PLUMBING FIXTURES S►nks / Shower Laundry ! Toilet Bath Tub Lavatory I hereby ogre that in case permit is granted all work which rholl be done and all materials which shall bo used ahall coza- ply with tho plans and specifications subrajnod and with all the ordinances of tt Village of Orono applicablo thereto. NO- ZS: it:µ/ he cu Sc Signori1e�!-i�%�L - - Receipt No (2__y Date_ Bldg. $e ) -)Plumb. Sr U Sowago i.- 1 Torts M�Z THE SEWAGE SYSTEM INSTALLED BY PTAME ADDRF S t' . WA Va V&&_ /_ IX�,f t , ; : A-- - Crystal ray,;�,innesot,::.//'� ;minutes of meeting field in the Village Hall on Sept.22,I958,at 7:30 P.M. Presont: 1-1. R. Ros3,llayor; R. C. Ba1,ley,K. iurnham, �.0. �7ood,C. F,.I: axviell, Trusteea u.Assessor; A.G.Stinson,Foreman;Ger�lc� Ross.Constable;O� ..Johnson. .�.Hana-n, Minutes of meetings field on Aug.25 and Sep.8,1959,were r^ad and approved. Attorney Louis B.Brechet,representing the Hub Barber Shop at Navarre was present regarding the parking situation on County Road I9 at the intersection of County Road I5,asking for continuance of angle narking versus p rallel parking.Council decided to look into the situation further and bring up later for further consideration. The continuance of the present contract with the Suburban Hennepin County Relief Board was unamimously approved. The I."inneeota "tatershed District Act was further discussed and ordered held UP for further review turd dlnr:z:,sion. The public park situation in our Village was reviewed and Turnham suggested that an offer be made to the owners of property desired, If this could be accomplished legally,on a basis 1;'5000.00 per annum until cleared: Clerk will consult legal ailhorities and report result at next Maxwell moved that the present trailer restriction be valved in the case of Mrs.Sigafoos,nllowing her to use trailer in its present location. No second to motion was made and the motion died. On recuest of ",ard Ferrell for the erection of another residence on his property on County Road 45,Bagley moved, seconded by Turnham, that his recuest be granted subjec$ �iowever to the review and a,,roval of our Planning Corn. The budget for I9b9 was set at 5 IO2,000 for "illage operation and The County Auditor will so be advised. A notice of meeting. of the Orono District Dev.Gorporation,c,n Sep 25th,at The Orono High School was broug:,t up and representatives of our Council will nrr^nge to attend. Verified Accts.,No.607 ti.rough No.669 were reviewed and aonrovad with the exception of one involving the purchase of toole from the Searsf►Ro, ck Co. on wiiicii further cletalls will b,� reni. ested inclu,,.Ing me«o.Invoice. .'eet' ridjour :1 suoJect to call on October I3,1:59. r1. 1:'. Jonnson,Clerk. Ao sit f � r .37 01Hi - �. Ordinances No. 7 An Ordinnnco Regul&tlnd PIe- fing in tho Villago of Orono. HonaopLn County, Mlnnosota. The Village Council of the Vil- lage of Orono ordains: That the following regulations be, and the same are, hereby adopted and approved; and shall be known as and may be cited as "Village of Otono Subdivision Regulations." Purpoao In order to safeguard the best interests of the Village of Orono end to assist a subdivider in har- monizinp his interests with these of the Village at large, this ordi- nance Is adopters in the hope that adherence to it will bring results beneficial to all concerno d. It is obvious treat piecemeal planning of subdivisions will bring a disastrous disconnected patchwork of pattern and poor circulation of traffic unless its design, and ara:igement are cor- related to a Master Plan Study aiming at a unified scheme or community interests. It is, there- fore, necessary for the Orono Village Council to make certain regulations a n d requirements which contr`.bute to the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the community. In the long range analysis, the Plan- ning Commission believes these regulations will aid in raising property values for the subdivid- er and will effect many econornies in the platting and development of & logical subdivision. "Subdivision" in this ordi.iance means the division of a parcel of land into two (2) or more lots or parcels for the purpose of trans- fer of ownership or building de- velopment; provided that a divi- sion of land for agricultural pur- poses into lots or parcels of five (3) acres or more and not involv- ing a new street or alley shall not be deemed a subdivision. The term includes re -subdivision and, when npprupnatc to the content, shall relate to the process of sub- dividing or the land subdivid(A. Division of any existing lot, par- cel or plot of land shall be c,.)n- cidered within the purview of this ordinance. GENERAL iIEGUInEMENTS Btroeis 1. In any areas wF ei v the I'lan nutg Conu-nission has adopted a part or whole of a Luster Plan, the 'rpoced subdivision shall cone.. - in general principle to such Mu ,aer Plan and if the sub- division area covers a designated thoroughfare, such part of this main artery shall be part of his Plat and shall be dedicated by the subdivider. 2. In the design of the subdi- vision, provision shill be made for the proper connections with existing streets in adjoining sub- divisions or for the proper exten- sion of proposed streets into the adjoining property where such adjoining property has not been subdivided. In considering the extension of such streets, every attempt should be made to main- tain property values in adjoining subdivisions. (Adjoinint, develop- ments of unequal character should not be united by connect- ing streets unless it is deemed necessary in the public interest for street maintenance, safety and fire protection to do so.) 3. Street right-of-way widths shall be designed in accordance with their character and use. The following widths are suggested as minimum right-of-way for var- ious types cf streets: Right -of -Way a. Major arteries and parkways ........................100 feet b. Secondary and main thoroughfares ................ 80 feet c. Neighborhood residen- tial street . ...................... CO feet d. Minor residential street:; ............................. 50 feet 4. It is desirable that all streets shall intersect as nearly at right angles as seem:: practicai, taHng other factors into consideration. 5. Minimum center line radii of local minor streets shol: b: not less than 100 fc t; centerline radu of major and secondary th,,rourh- fares should be not le;•3 than 30J feet. fi. The location of all cur•c•1 streets i.hould be so r.rranged es to fit the natural top, r!rapl: r a.i closely as pvrtailile ,ind to malte possible desirable land sus+divi- ei+irts and sa!^ vchwular trn,?i+_ 7. Terminal rrsid,,ntial ctrccts or culs-de-sir• rhuul,l ix• l l.al,cf not longer ttior, 5o!) fo, t cry': tal,,it;rni lri,.trl i ndttnr ns rni,,P ii longer terminal street necessary. Such culs-de-sac should be avoid- ed altogether where possible. 8. A turnaround at the end of all terminal streets shalll be pro- vided of not less than 100 feet in diameter a the property line. 0. Street names may be indi- cated but shall not duplicate nor resemble too closely names of ex- isting streets in Orono or in the metropolitan area. Existing street names shall be used where the platted street is a logical exten- sion of that particular street. Alleys 1. In general, alleys shall not be permitted in a residential sub- division. Service drives shall be provided on major thoroughfares. Where alleys are necessary and approved by the Council, they shall be not less than twenty (20) feet in width. Alleys will be re- quired in No rear of all lots to be used for business purposes. 2. Where two (2) alleys inter- sect, a cut-o'T of not less than ten (10) feet along such property line from the normal intersection of the property lines shall be pro- vided. 3. Dead-end alleys shall be avoided where possible, but if unavoidable, shall be provided with adequate turn -around facil- ities at the dead-end as deter- mined ► he Council. Eii"rnonts Where alleys are not provided at the rear of properties, there must be provided a public ease- ment as a part of the plat. The purpose of such easement is to provide possible location for util- ity lines such as sewer, water and ;:as and for location of electric and phone lines. ;-suet, easement shall be nt t less than five (5) feet on each side of the lot line, mak- ing a total of ten (10) faet. No garages nor structures shall be built upon this easement. Ade- quate easement provisions shall b � tnac;e for area drainaga and !storm r:ctcr carry off. Blocks C uns;dera`)Ie latitude as to size !ai.x-ks is deemed desirable by the Council in order that the aubdivaien may be planned in blocks to runt the topography, the reneral , haracter of the site and t',e tl pc of deyclop,.ient appro- ,irrtal• to the locality. With the �r f 1011 irl .'Se of the autnrn the trend in residential subdivi- sions has been tuwij id a longer ieugth of block and a reduction of the percentage of land devoted to streets. Under certain cond4- tions, blocks up to 1000 feet or 12UO feet in length may be ac- ceptable. Lots 1. Residential lots, as to size and area, shall be governed by and subject to the policy of the Village Council which is hereby declared to be that all lots con- form in area to the existing lots in the general area of the pro- posed subdivision and in no event shall be less than fifteen thousand (15,000) square fee' in area, and minimum width of one hundred 0GO) feet at the build- ing ;:ne, exclusive of any ease- ment for driveway purposes (util- ities easement excepted?). 2. Depth and width of proper- ties reserved or laid out for com- mercial and industrial purposes shall be adequate t- provide for the off-street service and parking facilities required by the type of use and development conterv.pint- cd. 3. Each lot ,.hall adjoin upon a public street and shall have a minimum width of th:rty (30) feet at street line. Lots to regis- tered land surveys may sdjoin upon private streets. Said streets nonetheless shall comply with provisions pertains g to streets set furth in this ordinance. 4 Double frontage, and reverse frontage lots, should be avoided except where essential to provide %eparation of residential develop- ment from traffic arteries or to overcome specific disadvantages of topography and orientation. A planting screen reservation of at least ten (10) feet, and across which there shall be no right of access, shall bt provided along the line of lots abutting such a traffic artery or other disadvan- tageous uses. 5. Side lot line shall be sub- stantially at right anal,•% or radial to street line, Flood Areas Areas within the )urisdiction of the Village Council %ub)ect to flood conditions as established by the Engineer of the Village of Orono will not be considerod for subdivision purposes until ade- quate drainage has been previd ed. Plaiting on Public Property The planting of trees, type, spacing, etc., on public property shall be subject to the regulations of the Village Council. No plant- ing, gateways, entrances and sim- ilar improvements shall be made on public property except with permission and approval of the Village Council. Publl,- Open Spaces It is the: declared general polio: of the Vii;age Council that in ail new subdivisions not less than five per cent of the gross area of all property subdivided shall be dedicated for public use, each five per cent being in addition to the property dedicated for streets, alleys or other public ways. The Village Council may waive this requirement .f it feels that public property, other than roads, is not necessary in connection with this subdivision. 'The area thus dedicated should he either u :able area or area which can 1>e Vsit into usable shape by the subdivider. The subdivider shall leave land so dedicated in a condition satisfac- tory to the Village Council. The varying size of sots, the size of the subdivision, etc., will have a direct bearing on the de- sirability of and the necessity for such dedication as well as the size of the piece to be dedicated. 1t will be within ih-� dis,retion c,f the Planni.•I; Commission to interpret these regulations in the light of the overall plan and pat- tern of park development. In the interests of the Village as a whole, and, therefore, of benefit to the subdivision, the Village Council of Orono is de- sirous of conserving certain areas of natural beauty and establish- :ng in various areas the logical distribution of the following types of facilities: 1. Play lots, for preschool chil- dren 2 C:hildren's playgrounds, f o r ch.idren tram five to fifteen years of age to use for active play 3 Athletic fleld. a•s ■ specialued cenld r for organised games and sports. 4. Parks, lame and small, for 'heir value in passive ricrea- ti. i and as a ling range pro tectiun from cungest.on of de- elopmenl A cooperative interest in this larger program is sought by the Village Council and it is expected the subdivider will aid in assist- ing to make this achievement possible. Platting Procedure The Council of the Village of Orurr.> requires that all proposed subdivisions shall have the prior ,proval of the Planning Com- ir. before receiving final ap- i>y the Council. 1t is, .ore, necessary that certain i os be taken and data a' •em- bled that will enable the . can- ning Commission to study the proposed subdivision in the light of its relation to the Village plan for growth a;id development, and in the light of the general topog- raphy and the character of the development. To accomplish this purpose, the Planning Commission will wish to submit the preliminary plat to their Village Engineer and to their Consultant fur their study in field and office and for their recommendations. This prelim- inary plat for the consideration of the Planning Comnu uion shall be filed with the Village Engineer or Planning Commission not less than five days in advance of a regular meeting of the Planning Commission to allow sufficient time for review, study and a recommendation pertaining to this plat, at the next regular meeting. Whenever possible, it is desir- able that the preltrrunary plat be accompanied by a written state- ment specifying the iatenVons of the owner respecting the pro- po;ed character of the develop ment, deed restrictions, drainage. parks and playgrounds and the intended date of beginning devel- opment lie should express his willingness to proceed to file a plat of record of his subdivision or such part thereof as he may wish to put upon Cie market and to install all monuments shown on the prat The Planning Commission in its consideration of the prelim inary plat, will take irite consid eratiun the requirements of the Community and the test use of the land being subdivided Par ocular attention wits t* even t. the artengement, location arvd widths of streets. the ger.ers. drainage situation. lit sires and arrangement, as well as anv Mas- ter Plan requirements such as parks, school sites, boulevards, highways, etc. Adequate street connections will be rer-nir?d to insure access and freedom of traf- fic circulation. i'Se subdivider, after the ap- proval of the tentative plat by the Planning Commission and prior to the submission of a final plat, shall within six months after the date of approval, or such longer period as the Plan- .,rng Commission may grant, cause the property to be surveyed to accordance with the api 3ved tentative plat and any anci all change3 therein as approved by the Planning Commission. The survey shall be made in acccrd- ance with the standard practic,s and pr nciples for land surveying and all monuments shall be sub- iect to the inspection and ap- of the Village and the ,ty Authorities uefore ap- r..,vel of the flnal plat. Final plats must be submitted to the Village Engineer or Plan- ning Commission not less than five days in acvance of a regular meeting of the Planning Commis- sion for its approval prior to sub- mission to the Village Council. The Council requires that all streets shall be graded and grav- elled as a part of the develop- ment. Such work shall be done under the supervision of the Vil- lage Engineer and subject to spec- ifications prepared by the Village Engineer and placed on file with the Village Clerk. Inlerior Streets The subdivider shall Bride and gravel streets at his own expense. In case this work is not complet- ed for a logical reason when the final plat is presented, a perform- ance bond with a Surety Com- pany approved by the Village Council shall be furnished before final plat is accepted. DetisWatry Streets The subdivider may petit►u.., prior to acceptance of the Anal plat, that the grading and gravel lint to dune by the Village with full costa aaessed against the benefltted property over a period not In exceed ten years IrteUr loary Flat Tour prints of the preliminary plat of a proposed subdivision shall lie submitted to the Orono Planning Commission drawn to a scale either one inch equals one hundred feet or one-half inch equals one hundred feet. The preliminary plat shall con- tain the following information: The proposed name or legal description of the subdivision. 2. Its location with reference to k n o w n existing thorough- fares or section corners, etc. 3. The boundary lines with di- mensions of the tract to be subdivided. 4. A topegraphical map of the area (showing contours o; the land in general not greater than one foot intervals). Map should indicviL location and width of existing adjacent streets and utilities with es- sential elevations and make note of bench mark used and it. elevation. 5. Owner's name, Subdivider's name, and the Surveyor's name and certificate. (Sur- vey shall be made by Regis- tered Land Surveyor.) 0. Scale, North point and date of plat. Preliminary street profiles showing present grade, pro- posed grade (every 100 fee ., complete with p -nt grade and showir sfac- tory disposition cf ... n m wa- ter. Two prints of profile — one to be returned to the subdivider when approved end acceptable. 8. All plats and profiles shall b: ar tL(, standard Statc Board of Registration Certifi- eate, properly executed. 9. Proposed building lines on all lots intended residen. tial use and in a, ... _•ases re- quired on lots intended for busiress use, and at least the setback required by the Building Ordinance and any applicable Zoning Ordrnancle. 10. Owner's name of unplatted property, lots, blocks, and name of subdivision of plat- ted property within 150 feet of the boundary lines of pro- posed subdivision 11 Copy of the provisions of any protective covenants where- by the subdivider proposes to regulate 1,)nd use to the rub di%,ic n. ris P • t 11equiremeel The i n,nar, ,'at irs out- lined abo fe is a prerequisite to the submission of the final plat. Approval of the preliminary plat is tentative only. Approval of the final plat shall be obtained from the Village Council after first re- ceiving approval from the Plan- ning Commission upon submis ston of sarne with the complete informatiun outlined in the re- quirements specified herewith. The final plat shall conform to the preliminary plat as approved, and, if desired by the subdivider, it may constitute only that por- Lion of the approved preliminary plat which he proposes to record and develop at the time, provid- ed, however, that such portion conforms to all requirements of these regulations. The following data shall be shown on -r submitted with the final plat. 1. Boundary su, .ey. 2. Dimensions — all necessary. 3. Angles —at all boundary and block corners. Forpose for which sites, other thar, residential lots, are ded- icated or reserved. 5. Minimum building setback line when required by the Village Council. Location and description of monuments. Other data: such other cer- tificates, affidavits, endorse- ment::, or dedications as may be required by the Village Council fur the enforcement of these regulations. 8. In lieu of the completion or installation of any cr all of the above improvements, and before the Anal Plan is ap- proved and recorded, the Vil- lage of Orono may accept a cash deposit or surety bond to secure to the Village the actual cost of such improve ments as estimated by .he Village rngrncer. 9 Streets and alleys (by anrles and distances). 10 Above description should in- c'.ude all center,ine curve data 11. Street names 12 Block linos and block num bers. 13 Lot lines and lot numbers 14 Easements and their widths 15 All necessor) certificates re- quired by law. 18 Name of subdivision, scale, date, north point and all oth er pertinent information ger.- erally required on plats. 17. The form of approval shaL, be as follows: a. This plat was approved and accepted by the Village Coun- cil of the Village of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meet- ing thereof held this.......... day of..............................A. D. 19....... ............................... I ............ Mayor ............. I ............... .., I ....... ......Clerk b. This plat was approved by the Planning Commission of the Village of Orono at a %t_- ular meeting thereof held this .......day of................A..D. 19..... ....... ...............................r hau-man e. Checked and approved tiis ........day of................A.D. 19..... County S4.rveyor, 3fennepin County, Minnesotu. Should any secticii, paragraph, clause or condition of this ordi- nance be declared by the courts to `je invalid, the same shall not validity of the ordi- nal- a whole or any part th; .,t other than th- part so dvc.ared to be invalid. Thi9 ordinance shall be pub- lished in the Minnetonka Herald published at Wayzata, Minnesota and shall be effective from and after such publication. Passed by tke Village Council of the Village of Orono this 12th day of September, 1955. H. R. Ross, Mayor. Attest: O. E. Johnson, clerk. I --c .gip. ell) di -kill", .7,,,, u.1, All. ?IS S"J�ina' (if 1ever -or rnair:t..Ined in iiaid roning dig- i j,h&#t It L wt SIAM 0jeeliol at the I orie't vv pt sit.ris beiring only the be tioll )f this reso] ,f Q,^ r(..Pti(; I.- tits of III%cv. "hd the fljl.% it-ict, Lnd tilt! navicr. ofid"i's 7t1.!l . Ct-qL0.�1i(Ilk and rco-Octico i �;l V! t n. ,p, MITI, except strei h rot- Section IV. Inarries and traffic signs, and x seciinsi IM, AND BE IT FURTHER RIC.- 'igns advurtiping for sale u AND BE IT iURTIMR UP. bent, " , the premises on wbich the SOLVED AND ORI)AINED That the following area and district io SOLVI.'N.) AIND 0WOMM101, That i may be located. Isaid Orono Township be, and the the J(,.Io%npt orir.-* Ifid ilistrlo-t in, 3. No bu:ldii,..- or other etruc Orono same is hemby dv.,iii;naled ss a ,ai,l TnwZilp be, WjJ the Iture shall fit, crectf-d upon an i,; h^rcby dt' "N11"id " 0 land within the above z,�Iningdi zoning district of the ,To" of Orono, pursuant to the JuV'3,41 the tome,lovtome,d`vt - cirt oi'the Town Of j trict except where the Itull Orono. L State of 1knnesota, to -wit: pursuant the laws Of which the building e)r at I. It r sl.,Ae If Mirlj,!t�.ota, to -wit. t�;I*C is lo be ers•etvd conir, lill, es I 1. Stubwa Bay viarict Orow t-ir "buildilot" as 1wreinatter d "buildine Tlint part of Sections T bk**,- nined. A I I ., '3t" is here That Part of Sections Two (2, I eii fined to be land owned and r (31) and Thirty-two. t22), Tov and Tl-r,�e (3). Township One one ownership which equals I tip On* -1jun&ed Xjgh. t,:en (118), Range Twenty-thm lhnilr(,d FwIvent..". (117), 11ange cxcei-As an area of one and o. (23), Hennepin County. AUbnL- 7W(�A_.'y-threa (23), 11 e n n e p i n hail acres. prov:dvd, lhowev rota, and Sectionx.jMve (A), Six ('ULA-'It%,, M-Inneii,113, and of Stec -!hat .hatwhere, at the tine this re (6) and Eight (6). Towh" on* tivn Thirty-rM.- (35), Township ard ordinar ' -,e shall to Hundred 8,!vftteen (117), R=ge Ore H-indrcl iMlliteen (118), ct11*'.,t, the kind 'LIS been Platt I Twenty-three (23), HennepinTlatq;c Twenty-4:Arec (23), Hen- into Iolv- and a plat filed of r County, I'Airmosota, described as ncptn County, .714nnescita, dr?- . fird with the Register of Deeds C f0ll(VY1:, on iU rvrrig at a *�dnt CIA follQU19.1 I Hennepin County, and the Reg' where the Nv�:;t line of the town - All of Sectiot Two(2), 7cwn- trnr ut Titles of Hennepin Co ty, ship road rt*%Wg North and !,'-.Ip One HMAdred Siiv.mean and i% here the area of any Eu South an Ceuta section line of j (117), Range TWwAty-tI-.Ice (23). excc-,t the tr!AIPLIAr oficrit patted i3 less than one -half acres in I Section Five *A), Towniihip, One piece area, each lying mrtbemtm-ly of the Fit shall constitute Gne "buildi 11 wm!red Seventeen 0 M. Rangeland right of the ri-sam line ofiut"'. and provided further, th Twenty-three M), Hennepin County. Minnesota, interseig-ftl tt No-Lhern Rallror.d, where, tit the Wrie this resuluti the toutherly side of the right .i:d t im triangular r:1P,,e crid ord.**nance shmil take off, of wa-, -f the bliariesota Wast-I of !rind lyrig nMthv"f.,rIy of 'h,? a' e3 Of WAY UPP)atteJ Pepara ern I ; --j 4abo-known as the I• the tigl-t of way of the Muine- Plece uf PruWrf; undei One 6* Luce linei theme in a north - sota Wesiclrrt R-Allro id, 60;.0 Ship is here 11tiLl one v1A �Dn west",ly direction alms tne, kr., vr,� A- - v.`ts the T _..4rt4q); half ccircs in arca, iach such Se soulhtr,y line, of : -ad tight of and ara4 piece cl psopertW shall co "bvj'4i*x way of said Minnesota weawn. All of 3,ectiou Three (3 . T own- irtitute one I*L" Putilruad to a point where maids pEip One Hundred Sti-criu-,-n as* family dwa, -- -, 1%1th sect HDO intersects the West Lot )(I '117). r:,n6i; Twenty-three k.23), 1) ing East of Ccualy Rc I Num• gory bwldinir; cu-'.t mariiy in conjunction with fi roily the E.,st one-half (Ely) of Sec- btr One Hucired trty-site MCI; and asldr.-ed a part Of tion Thirty-one (31), Township (146), arij southeasterly of the farruly dwelling . "bualding One Hundred Eight*" (118). han te Twenty-three (U), thence- i Mht of To ay of the Mllu,�Iuta n any onq Let i, ,t WILZIerri Paillroad. (.Avi kno wn ;spry ry boil. shall be dec-A.Aed Sc .f: :,long the North -South as the Luce Brie); fachad !,.;" bi"Idings as au -arriter lint of said Secticin Tkir. &ad �ccri:ap..ow boat thwo ty-cvw (31) and uilin Six (&I t.4rt ol Secuor. Tt&ty. "Unt" ur W 11 hcv,*%. ch;, nip Cline Flundred SorThiLt . (35). 7u-vru;up One Hundred , &-uLma. berm. or other fume b teen j117). Range Twcnty-thm Lehlern 0161, Range Twentyl, ingot. I M . Ile, the tent -r point nf W;1 'Rix three 423). contained Ir. a Irian- , 4. Nathirij heroic: ( be shall 11 be I Mkctwn (6). Township One, Hundred Seventeen (117), Harw ale of Lrid formed by the south-* strued to prohibit at, owner TwLetiv-three (23). thence Eno visterl:�- I!ne cf the r!ght Of w-tv 4 land f - arn e.-itmaing on t);# li along the North I.n4. of the' of th- Minne�,ota We -tear, Rall- by him any ttk4e or I 'Atto &mtheast LWite-qtarter ISM W road, knovm as the LUI'ejdI-,1ry or prof.v!un wUich, litioi.). ;.rd the sQuthweottoi IY line I It. tense tm the. land at the Sectif'n Six (it). Tvwn Pop On:-, of 9 k-- - fight of v.- tv of the main oil the adoption of this Itundrvd Savvriteen (11-1 Itange III f the (;ma* N,.rtlh--rn Rii'- t n - I ordininte, 4.rid the Twwrity-:Tree (22). to to-' v - th. * Ir " It . d tJw_ So -tit L-tit: of -is d actmit of AM- , v, .: lation a"nj I w(A r,incr A the -1 One -quarter of the F 4 Sty t;#n 7?-irly-1,Ave (351 strictacm. -r Ir, ri, I -imtr c1irl& -0 One wrier (NIK11vu. 17& of q pr r MITHER RESOLVED' tu JdWis0 s oi hli-ir.ii tot use S"tiviii Six (6j. Townxhip tmw A % P ?(DA:%AI). That the fol. "'n"ectioll with !t,sch Uade ew I fundred Sevornt# en i 117), Mmge le A,-r •Ll - irrulatirris so-- 4 re- dt.ttry )-( fr "Jvn 111111PItch Is 1, 1 we-rity-three (23) thence Ilevolk.' wilh rv.,torct to -if Un ilk LIM at thl. ti I aloung the West law ad &Wti j;!t-,1ivtv la,id, ;IrA buildin.-it within of Ill t f this reis()lul Lit t Northeast One -quarter of 110e III .1fo-tnWritiono'd Boning die MW rwiilinan, r rol the enact I of this rrruletw-i %rd rvqt,-Jr Scloutho.-A L*w-quarter MR%, !I !ti.t shall li inet are he;rhy out doll lu.ythtng 1-4-rrin SRI, 1 of S#vt,va SLIA (0), Town. as fulia.u., tv-wtt rained be c.-n%inwAt in proh, t ship One Ifundmitt Sortivailis" 1 1.1.41 vw-.:"8 Alstrict 0 hrr- the 1116 *f CI,4 I&I'd III the I, (117). PjLn&* Tway -three MQ I_ (it !.IIW4 to 1`4 0 PtIVAIr I- '- 1.viovosl duhirt. " no omkisr.&I, 11hil"ing Eating dA$b'k*t �., arricultitlal if, a Point whwv god HM vmlwr- 0--ti; UK shove li" f I rwpo-eit;w. tia, be ;,iIi:• .trm4 in gv,)htkwt ifth• ev hit_ •'• ,i• i. ^. ♦'.' : 1 stet .,.•. t .. 1 .i J' t a'!.n0" t .1•' r•it: lii .tt. ...t '!r t .. • ..,y [ a !.' nC!•1 �. 'P alloU ' West- •the Nita ter pl, tlnpt'•tty: Air,— . rt: '►ear•• u' %'.i:. • .-It it:1V to a � Jr,le laircN u ;r.>♦•Ctly lath utw ;mn' v'ht'tr -t,• 1-6: fit- IJta.r ;-nt7 u 2u9./ thin eft. r...ru ;titPr'ts tt:^ •+r 1.- .adt ot1t in ::t.t, sneer •u!'h «'runt•• Niece -hannei ecnr • ' fi Vf.t•twelt lat p:• rer,y► •h�:-�+•ntAT .. me fl uid SiuldMin on ".tutl +rot_ inf •S 'iJv, Like Only .,nt • IV -Ay t:ctonk thir•e nort�,t•.•;tcrl�'Ldwelling along .be wcs,♦rly .i:dt or ,:aid,,1 i!y used ict tonlunetlunchmnel to a point there it in•fiinaly 4vw•:iltup and con•tessera the shorlie• of Stubbsd 9 per; of stich family Bay. Lake Minnetorka; thence may be erected on any westerly, northerly and eeaAerly"bud ng lot " Accessoo sleti,q tic west shore line of :aidn;•s dull he dee,ned M ia• Stut•:•: JAY to a poin' w;iere tine ; c:'.;w _ xi, t u':d:nga ,n atria Cot- utid shore 'ine verse(-ts the ;.,rt , ,I.,,sef 'mat houarb, Puri p Wert skis• of townsh!p road run. 1 ur '+ell hoc• ,, chicken house.,. nrili North and Scutt, nn fen-bera „nd •.rnt. farm Lwldings. er r:•ct,on line of Section f: ' .n.; herein tcl,tdined s!lall be ( , Townrhip One IN : i : cd to ,wrn►it ur author- Serenterr (117), aianlre Tt. Y• �• :r v nrrsvn w hrt.�,evcr to !hree (23) txtetided; thence) ut.!tA, Slith 1r:r`tt,rV builders:. !north along he Wert it -tie offor nr,y of theca, n o: related to ,a,.I towtiltrl•Jr road eX:ti-1-1 tot -in, ^ommercwl enterp,r,e coo.. the Foirtor,,csv►nini,, -.lua•.tJ upon'1.• ,)iveni,ts. .,nd wl..ch said rontur dierict I i,au Ir tetretrt , to sis the Stubb's 4. Nothit,g herein contain-J Bay distt". "I ►w cunstiueJ l.t prohibit au HE IT FUVr = hL xim owner of 14nd within the said \1D GRDAJPIIF:D,•That tol- 7Antnq di-rrict Irvin cuntiouing o, low nJes. r••r(tlA..uorfs and r.,1'ric. itl;q. land owns-J u% hem, ling inoustry or prufcssion which i ties. ;.ndith respect t� .. •es of the � in a xiftence un all %and at th . ltttttrts ,)1 g disebutidlhtc vt itdiln the I time ._ f the Aopf i,,n of the, ra:so- a. - • re it e' d op tcirahalI bt: ws, 1, t 1,n and faidinance. and the en- s. ^ hereby xdupleat t:.: lolloti•s, , .p wl• as It :em t•f Oki% 1•txul..tion SIMI re- .cw a. or tram tx+nat• uetin;; any t c,Ki -„tope diarist s hele•�1,.:;+1ing or buiW-rigef lur u•• in tPOs,t.d tv ►w % p►ivstt red- tud district, ar.d no Wildins dine 'tor with ion rich :Ir "i otl:crt ate uct.ure of i•nprovel::«... rx ,ry or pd in .ion which Is )r 1 At.11 he,eat'ri lie erected, altetedle1' irate and in ,•fr The of U.,; .�,.. t at the I n:r ,.f The adol•l:.': u; r•trWmd fir• tjw nr be amid i•: Ittf Ihl, RSOt;Ittt,n J.t•! a:df!,;.n,a or., ..a s u:hur thlut :A ne td►tectruert of this rtgula- 1 'met and r•strievon; near atiall L. N., r 'xtardc or ether a t-Ian, :I ntg hri tin con.ainrd isc c-,n- va. t:r•ttig sixna, dtiiplayr ate otht JrI tit pi t.hibit i fit r. t ni ;,i., `jury; of any KinA shall be erix•t«d ij.n + er tfie !raid tuna •ni,ntaimd in w:i 7011dig JI& 1•,., '";"Wtutul or farm u•ct , xiry: .,gas tM•,.Ing only) �x" ' • the ci• roes of the residents M he, , ,.lir:r'c at.d the darer+ of ,itself w..gq tnor:.•t. etsrtp+ •:-net am i► fit' iT F•t'HT41lR nE- ,&%W -runes . r•i. t!atf,c 10A. aria ''!•t•t', ANI► Oil MOLD Tha, i�:arpt sitnh for sal.' '1' ' 'nR arra and t-ftatri, of ref.r, t►.e stet^ a whicl. IUwr�hip tit' rnd 1 . '.0 ',u:. limy( L.•.: ^ '.t saw, . 1 e+ .ref r,%n W :i i : 'i•in tht u' to•unt; :, tit •tyt wIlvi iiw ;and ,:;„ �', ►. 't !!te hi.:ldme ,t Cher erw lu,• is to be erec*, rd ct ns'„ot v a bw1dinit lot" as hereir.:at•+ t. nhrl. A "bidd,cl Lit" to fine t. r: rw4,,.t .,retort•^--�,•. •hall tact .•A'•• , wt." aw. 4t, d.•J art leer .: .t.'e{d r.tth fur Ate f Tk1r-. ,.I ►N► u�ptn t .::rw'T lirtsteao.a..:rl •herd Wr area AV il,ft% 6,11 "N let fit • M to Me . •W .n • •Y I. t. Tt It, T" ,1. it . \� tie , •. .f' , • -K• tt • r ninl D.sfricl i.• t. t •a:r•.s► to � iCi T.. r. 111. T ,+ ns,a� ter 1 .. t :cv1.r•'e n t1l' a rig, t'• ..•attar .t •h, a+Ir t i •►r "forth 1 vtt of ,•,-. ,,, ••• • ••1. i l►, Toe �,:.t.i� :w if Jr. a 'A 7;..%, rKoer• , f 17 r •Iry l• a•. w fit' ,.der f t' "!eel •r ' ('h t l .:.r till: •rcttrnYa It , •tl a st ttssr••^t'ir P •a,a� t. a t/esri t•l •,1i'l S.ehM tMver, A -I, on of J:,,�: 1 . n Irn;pl •igl,• ..i .�:.♦11b :. ?i:•;tctivisiun :• nr •P'irn,• ►lunfirtd Fifty -Pox !i•'Wepia County. INi.:ne- te. r;;ten9'•d nnrtAwcrterly; • tree +unnLnif •soU1htastcr'.vl nag the said aollthvir"crty ne of said subdivision, and ite nrtA:••eafcrly extenrwn to the rae.af••tion of raid hue with the •d:ndty :ow watt_ mark of •ti., M.rntUL ka; thence run- inr, .Ions *At,! Thor« hrn in a wlhe.islerty dirx'tion, and thra r an C..sterly direction, 2tui tht n in a scuAlrerly direction. and the•i in a nor'.hri ly d.-ecti•-jn follow•- Ing the litre drMtd by the c• ti- nary low water it ark of Lase Mir.netonka, to th.• nc;nt ::l b,•- Rinn'ne. s"d which bald itotd it• district -,hall be referred tv as the Brack- ett', Poto' district. LE IT F'Ult : HER iJMLV tD AND ORDAINED, Tl.«t t:ic ,of :utr,n( rule:. regukiicas krxl r• - strirtio rs w.'f-. mpe♦t to ;ore a the• lartd.:; and b,.ildingee v;it►an LnL above goring d.Ftrict shell be d :,tea herrhy Ndrit..-d as fcl- w••. 10-W:1 A. Use Dr Jriett fflat,: zvr tit, .1.-.-1 t tided ir;o u,e .I :theta to be sna.e,i to "t':afuential klw- rvt- ntlAarta! diatrirt " 1. All t; ;,nrt:ori of "-.id con- d Orki uthrr tlwn that h' '•e- het ,.ascribed sad rtceignswel the "commetrial dietrir'" is t ebv • ---stsnated iiid established as the 'rts/dent:al ut:ttr.ct." 2 The toiler ng dasonb, d pe•tion of said tcwng otatrret i l*Tvby .4e>•igaated and tst.hl f ,'s a ommercuti 3tstr'iet" +lover,• 1val fit,% Ono t i ► xnd 71s • :1, 'Oel it.n R.':t ern r 11 Tatvm%k t:� `:, • Murhired Sc. •ntt-rtr (1171, ?<tnar . wen"-- mra•• M. Her►1••pir Coaur\. Idinnesc•a. dart f:+•Pd aerial; :a• Th.,t ^set aft 0overriu.rnt "9 U^c t 1) •sat -vrl, as foikra.,,. • ,r ncl'tt• al .l 1 .. J't vl, :h• ' ., . h••,r . 1-.lc. �: r,l.^^•ttk,a ., sir;, leer nu '•,.westrr t •i, .let taro, a NM' 'i•'.rtni' ♦••rift I A: •i„n..'•�r,l G"'41) 1\tail a ntu which l% Swth Ttra Of, '•I if"i r-Lf 11"' r.i itur•lrset t r. . Is awe .: WOA MV DI lent from tie felt e* -t 10 & q yi? FFTiNG NI AY 2 87 /N�o�ewt�i /oN �O le r �• IAIW LJ Ale � CITY off° ORONO Post Office Box 666Crystal Flay, Minnesota .646323•Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka January 26, 1987 4 14r. Ward Farrell 3405 Watertown Road Long Lake, 14N 55356 Re: Variance Request 3411-3415 Watertown Road Orono City 1pplica' 0990 Dear Mr. F,',•rell, Tha,1k you very much fo- providing me with a copy of the letter that you had indicated you had drafted but had not yet sent t�) Mr. Neil Murray. [reviewed the file regarding the natter. As I am a new r;emb(ir of the Council, I have not dealt with this matter previously and therefore felt the back;,round appropriate. In review of the file it is my understanding that yo. a parcel of land approximately 4.19 acres until 1958. The rcel contained 1 residence that is currently 3425 Watertown Road. Baud on the fact that the City d.d not desire not tv have two residences on a single platted piece of property, you su'jdivided the property in order to build the residence at 34�5 Watertown Road. In the subdivision process you created four lots out of the single piece of property. The lots are as follows: 3425 Watertown; Rcad - 1.29 acres "3415" Watertown Road - 1.04 acres "3411" Watertown RoPd - .85 acres 3405 Watertown Road - 1.01 acres. Subss�.quent to the subdivision you built your current residence at 3405 Watertown Road and sold the lot at 3425. In April 1985 you appQa -.ed the Zoning Adm1.nistrator's decision. The Building. and Zoning Administrator had indicated in response to your rerf,rest for a huilding permit that the two par7erl s at ?411 and :0,1'a were not buildable under the! current R1. 11 PING, A l(W1S(; 411 711,7 • Af)'N1tiISM%1101, A 11%ANO - 473 71iX • Pt'R1,1C VA ORi:r - 47l 7100 Alit! ti51%(; 11r, Ward Far re11 Page 2 January 26, 198'( zoning code. When this mutt wcis considered in May, 1 A5 by the City Council they indicated that because of the situation they might approve one additional site, but not two additional building sites. The Council upheld staff's interpretation of the ordir►anee at tha. point and recommended that you file for a variance if' you desired to build at all on those lots. In October of 1985 you filed for variances for both unbuilt lots, it was reviewed by she Plinning Commission first in November of 1985. In February of 1986 the Planning Commission recommended that variances for two building lots be denied. This was considered by the Council at its Marcie 10, 1986 meeting and again at its April 14, 1966 meeting. At it;; April 28, 1986 meeting, the ',ouncil directed staff to draft a resolution of denial. Council tabled this matter both at its May 12, 1986 and Flay 2'(, 1986 meetings at your request. At the Council's June 9, 1986 meeting three options were outlined to you together with the prez�entation of a draft resolution for denial. The Council had made a motion to pass the denial resolution which did include verbiage regarding the possibility of one additional building site on the property. You then requested that this be tabled. On June 16, 1986 according to staffs notes you had called and requested that this matter not be considered on June 23, 1986, but ttLit it be tabled for another month. It is my present unr:_rstanding the status of your application is that it- . has been tabled at your request. This matter may main be . ought up for Council discussion. As you may be aware the Counc currently has three new members Diann Goetten, Bill Sime and r elf, together with Jim Grabek now being Mayor. At the Council's February 9, 1987 Council meeti9, they are anticipating tr fill the Council vacancy that wss created by Jim Grabek becoming Mayor. I encourage you to bring this matter back for consideration by the Council so that it can be resolved one way or the other. Once the Council has had an opportunity to consider it as two building sites (or if you ct„ose amending your request for one building site which I understand would still regUire a variance), then y+)u can pursue whatever other remedies yoi, feel appropriate. Should you have further questions or comments, please feel free to contact me. If you would like to be placed on the agenda Mr. Ward Farrell Page 3 January 26, 1987 n the future, please just write a letter to th-� C:ty ;iministrator and you will then be notified when yuur application w 11 be on the agenda. Sincerely, Barb Peterson Councilmember BP/dh cc: ilayor James Grabek Councilmember William Sime Councilmember Diann Goetten Mark Hernhardson, City Administrator Jeanne i•tabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson MEMO PAY 2 63 1987 of 04: O ONO Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator May 20, 1987 #1092, 1112 & 1142 Srth's Bay Marina & Yacht Club, Inc., 1950, 1955 & 1960 Sho.eline Dr. - #1102 - 1.950 Shoreline Drive - Zoning amendment to allow commercial parking lot in residential. zone. #1112 - 1960 Shoreline Drive - Conditional use permit to a] low a "less" non -conforming use of the subject property (transmission repair to boat sales service center use). #1142 - 1955 Shoreline Drive - Variances and commercial site plan review for new building and general upgrading/improvement of marina property. Conceptual Review of Comprehensive Plan Exhibit A - Applicant's Addendum Exhibit B - Total Site Plan 1955 Shoreline Drive (Area 1) Gerald Toberman, the new owner of the marina, `ormerly known as Sailors World, now referred to as Smith's Bay Marina & Yacht. Club, Inc. proposes :major upgrading of the existing facility„ The marina will function as both a private yacht club and marina at a proposed 79 slip boat Oensity. Exhibit A refers to a 3 story st- �_-ture but. applicant has submitted revised building plans/elevations that designate a 2 story structure with an open deck area at the top. The building measures 25 feet in height from existing grade. The general. upgrading of the site provides for improved landscaping (green buffer area adjacent to shoreline); a decrease of 10% in overall hardcover with major reductions in hardcover within 50 feet of the shoreline. For the purpose of this review, the marina property shall be referred to as Area 1 - exhibits for this section shall be referenced as 1-A, 1-B. Zoning Files #1092, 1112 & 1142 May 20, 1987 Page 2 of 1960 Shoreline Drive (Area 2) Mr. Toberman proposes acquiring the Tonka Tranzn'_ssion site for the purpose of leasing the property to Gary DeSantes of Sailors World for use as a retail boat sales and nautical supply shop. Per Orono Resolution #961, approved at the time of the rezoning of the commercial zoned property to LR-IA, residential, the City may consider a change in non -conforming use if the use is deemed a less intense use of the property. Minimal structural change is planned but cosmetic steps will be taken to restore structure. Major upgrading of the site is planned with the removal of the gas pump islands, new paved parking area and landscaping. The applicant advised that both operations (1955 & 1960) are independent of one another. The crossover problem will be alleviated with parking, restrooms, tele- phones, etc. provided at each operation. The removal of the curb cut on to Shoreline Drive with a single access at Spates Avenue will also help to reduce instance of crossovers. Once again, for the purpose of this review, 1960 Shoreline Drive shall be designated as Area 2 (i.e. Exhibit 2-A, 2-II). 1950 Shoreline Drive (Area 3) The applicant has asked the City to consider the use of the property at 1950 Shoreline Drive (Robie Wayne) as a parking area for overflow parking of marina and/or boat sales operation and employee parking. The parking use is not necessary for the project, but, if approved, would safeguard against parking inadequacies that have plagued the area in the past and most certainly complete the aesthetic upgrading of the area. Planning Commission Recommendations Area 1 - Unanimous approval of application as proposed (1 abstention vote cast because of business conflict). Neighbors in complete support of proposal - even with the original 3 story structure. No written negative comments received by City. Planning Commission felt the crossover activities would be minimal. Area 2 - Unanimous approval of application (1 abstention). Area 3 - Unanimous denial of a proposed amendment that would allow commercial parking area in residential zone. At first, Planning Commission was supportive with the eventual upgrading of the Wayne property and with the obvious su.,port of the most affected neighbors. in the end, Planning Corrun'ss.i on cou i.1 not br i nq themse 1. ves to vote on a comprehensive amendment that would affect ;ill resi�..Ient.ial property. 0 SMITH'S BAY MARINA & YACHT CLUB OVERVIEW: Smith's Bay Marina and Yacht Club is designed to be a first rate marina operation that will meet the needs and demands of our members. The present site will be revamped to become a safe, attractive facility, which will be a complement to the community. By separating the retail operation (boat and boating supplies) from the marina, two primary goals will be achieved. 1. To move to a less intensive use of both 1955 and 1950 Shore'i!e Drive, creating a more restful, compatable setting for the Club. 2. A:leviating the parking and pedestrian crossover problems which have traditionally plagued this area. Ample parking is provided for the individual operations with each facility being self- contained, i.�. parking, rest rooms, offices, telephones etc. We view this project, as do the adjacent property owners we have spoken to, as an asset to the neighborhood, the City of Orono, and the Lake Minnetonka area. 1960._SHORELINL DRIVE: (Minnetonka Transmission) The current site of Minnetonka Transmission will be converted for use as a retail boat sales and nautical supply shop. As shown in the site plan, elevated landscaping will be used to preserve the set -back from County Road 15 and to allow ingress and egress from Spates Avenue and Grand Avenue. Pump islands, storage tanks, and existing road sign will be removed. The present sign on the building will be utilized. Exterior modification to structure will be minimal, involving cieaninq. repair, painting as necessary. Interior use will involve sales office in present entry area, nautical supply store in one service bay area, and boat display ,n remaining bay. A total of 7 boats will be displayed 4 against building, 3 toward road. Smith's Ray Yacht (`lulr 1955 tihurc•lille Drat• Wavzata MN 55391 612 474-2534 ft SBYC Page 2 1950 SHORELINE DRIVE: (Current site of duplex and cabins) Although not necessary for the project, this lot is to serve as marina vehicle and employee parking area with 27 spaces available. By having employee parking at this site, customer parking at. the boat store and member - parking at the marina, every possible convern of parking would be eliminated. In the event of special evenL� .ai. either site, this lot would be used for overi'iow. It is our understanding that the City has encouraged use of its parking lot for this purpose in the past and would in the future. Consistent with the other 2 sites, landscaping will be used to blend this site into a residential area. Concerns of non -authorized use if this lot can be met by use of a gate, thus regulatir.g times of use. In sumit,ary, this property use is designed to contribute to the general aesthetic appeal of the area and to permanantly alleviate any and all concerns, which have existed in the past, regarding parking. 1955SHORELINE, DF,I I: (Marina/Club site) A total of 42 parking spaces will be available for member and gust usage. Member parking will be by permit sticker. With 30% of watercraft in use (an industry standard of peak use) and 1.5 cars used as an extreme example, 36 parkings spots would be required in this 79 slip facility. Employee parking and all marina vechicles will be kept in the overflow lot on Grand Avenue. A setback variance to 50 ft., is requested to allow green space next to waterfront. Proposed clubhouse will have three levels: I.EVEL I restrooms, courtesy phone and member area. LEVEL II Marina office and member area. LEVEL III Member use or future caretaker apartment. Buildinq will be wood frame with wood or wood appearanc4? exterior, mi[h'ti flay Yacht (.luh 195S 'Illotvh?w DI1%• 14'.��a,si:i. Mti 5.1391 612 474.2534 Page 3 1 Members will have access to restrooms and courtesy phone at all times by means of a coded lock. Balance of clubhouse area will be open from 8 AM to 10 PM Sunday through Thursday and 8 AM +-o midnight Friday and Saturday. Lighting will be of a type allowing minimum required for safety and security. Current signage will remain. Boat ramp is to be used for spring launch and fall retrieval of member's boats. This is not a public rpmp and will be gated to prevent p,:biic use. A significant dP, ease in hard cover will occur at this site, allowing for green areas, landscaping and gardens. Walkways to existing deck and docks will be 6 ft. wide to allow ingress and egress of boaters, guests and provisioning carts in a safe fashion. snoith's Nay Yac 111 t'1111► 1955 tihe,re•li►►e 1)eive• WayzdIa. MN 55.191 012 47.3 2534 specea LKrTtMG kCT: 4- of POLL MWN'LO Logo' • LOW -CvEL, OMLA•w LKYT SITE PLAN ■ Ll i 1. I l �_• Zoning Files #1092, 1112 & 1142 May 20, 1987 Page 3 of 15 Area 1 - 1955 Shoreline Drive - Marina Property List of Exhibits Exhibit 1-A - Application Exhibit 1-B - Property Owners List Exhibit 1-C - Site Plan Exhibit 1-D - Applicant's Addendum Exhibit 1-E - Hardcover facts Exhibit 1-F - LMCD Code Section 3.02, Sul.aivision 8 Exhibit 1-G - HenneFin County Letter of 5/l/87 Exhibit 1-H - Cook Iceview of 5/14/87 Sketch for Proposed Improvement of Shoreline Sketch for Surface Drainage Treatment Exhibit 1-I - Shoreline Elevations Exhibit 1-i - Elevations Exhibit 1-K - Floor Plans Exhibit 1-L - Lighting Designs Exhibit 1-M - Planning Commission Minutes of 5/4/67 The new owner ( � the marina proposes a major upgrading of the entire B-2 property. The fact that all improvements are new, code standards of the B-2 zone must be addressed by recognizing the need for variances although the improvements result in a less intense use of this severely limited property. A. Section 10.41, Subdivisiion 10 (A) Lakeshore Setback a) Principal Structure Required = 75' Fxisting = 9' Proposed = 50' Variance = 25' or 33.3% exi.stinq 66' or 88€ b) Deck Structure Connecting to Existing Duck Required = 75' Existing s 0' Proposed = 0' at. 929.4 elevation on site plan (Exhibit C) Variance = 0' or 100% H. Section 10.41, Subdivision 10 (B) Side Setback to Residential Used Property a) Principal S' ructure Required r 50' Existing - W Proposed] = 40' Variance = 10' or 20*., oy.isting 36' or 72% C. Section 10.41, Subdivision 10 (C) Street Setthack a) Frincipa1 Structure Required = 50' Pxist.inq = 70' Proposed - 50' 'Jo vat iance Pryui rF c! 'honing Files #1092, 1112 & 1.1.42 May 20, 1987 Page 4 of 15 D. Section 10.41, Subdivision 10 (D) Hardcover Total Area = 31,117 s.f. 0-75' Setback Area 25,017 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = .18,428 or 73.6% Proposed = 15,862 or 63.4% 10% "improvement in Hardcover. 75-250' Setback Area = 5,100 s.f. Allowed = 1,275 s.f. Existing = 5,100 s.f. Proposed = 5,100 s.f. Nr Change E. Section 10.41, Subdivision 9 Lot Area Required = 2 acres or 87,120 s.f. Existing = .71 acres or "?1,1.17 s.f. Variance = 1.3 or 56,628 s.f. F. Section 10.41, Subdivision 9 Setback for Parking From Street Lot Line Required = 30' Existing = 0' Proposed = 10' Variance = 20' or 66.6%, existing 0' or 100% G. Section 10.41, Subdivision 5 (A) Parking Requirements - 6 stalls per 10 slips 79 Slips Required = 48 Parking stalls Proposed = 42 Variance = 6 Stalls H. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 Setbacy Variance From Lakeshore for Accessory Structure (fence along Shoreline Drive) Required = 75' Proposed = 43' Variance = 32' or 43`A Land_scapi.nq - Green are:3s have been designated, but no plantings. Plantings shall not he recommended along Shoreline Drive because of sightinq proliloms. F'xistinq plantincs alonq south (public Access) will be maintained. Applicant may consider planting in grassed areas along shoreline and alonq northeast, residential lot ling as long as no sightinq problems are created. Zoning Files #1109 2, 1.112 & 1142 May 20, 1987 Page 5 of 15 Review of Schematic Design Drawings - The building has been redesigned at two levels with a roof deck. The fact that the structure will have a fire supression system (sprinkler), the roof deck can be approved. Once again the exterior materials nave not been called out but it appears to be wood - applicant should confirm. At the meeting, the applicant has advised that siding will be of wood or a metal that is designed to look like wood. The building inspector has reviewed the drawings and advised that the roof deck must have two exits if it is to be used by the public. In addition, the water supply must be determined ` sprinkler system. If lake is to be used, a fire pump and hydrant wil required. Note the building height is now measur.d at 25 feet. In original building plan, the applicant proposed a caretaker apartment but was advise that residential use is not permitted in a commercial district. The applicant's agent advised that this use is ,.ot of immediate concern and action an the caretaker apartment can be delayed. Staff would suggest a night time watchman. Many of the marinas use this typ of protection but others have residential units for raretakers on site (i.t. Minnetonka Boat Works has had a caretaker apartment .�r years and was never addressed in the annual license review). In light of the liabilities assumed by marinas with the keeping of expensive boats and other equipment owned by others, the use of a caretaker type apartment (non -rental unit) as a means of protection against vandalism and theft appears a reasonable compatible ase. The B-2 code would have to be amended to allow the use with specific controls for that use. Parking Areas - Parking areas should be surfaced with materials other than lime rock. The rock surfaci.nq creates a dust which silts up the grass ponding areas. The storm water runoff from the site should be controlled. The City Engineer has provided a sketch of rip rap with filter fabric adjacent to a grass strip suggested for area along the narrow grass strip adjacent to lakeshore in addition to propossinq a method to treat runoff prior to entering lake (review Exhibit 1-11). The parking lot should be surfaced with bitumincus covering arJ parkinq stalls designated. Fire lanes must be posted alone the west anal !oath sides of the principal structure. 13ec,11ve of Boat Slip Count at 79 - Staff met with Mi. Mixa of the I.MCD to review the existing dock play. and to obtain a status report on the boat density natter. Mr. Mixa , wised that the owner must proceed with a formal license appliction revie-. He noted that he did not feel the issue of a total 79 slipp allowance .ould he a problem. Mixa would confirm that there cer•.ainly would be no more than 79 allowed. r' alf .,e)uld recos+s+end that we tease our parkinq stal: variance determination on 79: Zoning Files #1092, 1112 & 1142 May 20, 1987 Page 6 of 15 Sectiun 10.41, Subdivision 5 (A) Parking Requests •- 6 stalls per 10 slips - at 79 slips Requz.red = 48 stalls Proposed = 42 stalls Variance = 6 stalls The following hardships or findings are noted: 1. There is no adjacent available area for parking; 2. The `V of Orono continues to allow overflow parking on weekends at the A pal parking lot by the marina. The City has always permitte- JJ encouraged this marina to use the municipal parking lot. on weeks :i.:s when not in use by City. Parking was a serious problem for the marina when Paul's fishing boat rental and boat operation shared the facility. Boat units were up to about 112 with 43 functional stalls. In the last 2 years with Paul's operation now gone, parking has not been a problem. 3. Based on the industry standard for watercraft of 30% at peak use and 1.5 cars used as an extreme example, 36 parking stalls would be required for this 79 slip facility. Dock Co:struction Without a Building Permit - Mr. Mixa confirms the dock was reconstructed last August without approval from the LMCD. The LMCD 1.987 license review will deal with the recor tructed dock but Mixa sees only improvements - a minor adjustment regarding slip configuration here and there. He is pleased to see the removal of the wooden boat ramps along the shoreline. Staff asked Mixa about the 24 feet width of the dock along the shoreline. He advises the LMCD is only involved with the portion located below the 929.4 elevation. Review Exhibit 1-I, Gary DeSantes reports that water comes up to the edge of the existing lakeshore structure when lake level is high. The problem along this section of shoreline is that there is little variation or changes in elevations. The varied wooden ramp structures that existed along the shoreline provided approximately 4,050 s.i. of hardcover. The current poposal provides 1,955 s.f. of hardcover. Woody Love has confirmed that this section of lock will be changed when they restore the shoreline area next season. It is the marina's intention tc apply for a conditional use permit to install a sea wall. The applicant would request that the present dock remain until restoration of the shoreline and they t„ paying all penalty fees with the required huiIdinq hermit. Zoning Files #1092, 1112 & 1142 May 20, 1987 Page 7 of 15 The spaced wooden deck surrounding the principal structure of 10 feet width providing 880 s.f. of hardcover is not objectable when one considers all the structures and varied deck platforms that existed on the property. Staff took issue with the lakeshore walkway section of the structure. One of the walkways is shown at a 6 feet width (in excess of the 4 feet width accepted by City for access to lake). Planning Commission concurred with the applicant that at least one walkway remain at a 6 feet width for handicapped persons and loading of equipment, etc. on boats. Review of Neighbor's Concerns - The neighbors in attendance through both reviews of the application were in support of the project. One property owner arrived after the second review of the application was completed and cautioned that certain variances would have to be addressed with the review of the marina property. The chairman advised the applicant of the tabling and invited the neighbor to put his position in writing - as of today staff has received no written comments from this neighbor. Two concerns noted by the neighbor for the marina property were the issue of the average lakeshore setback line and fences within 75 feet of the lake. Staff has once again reviewed the B-2 district, there is nothing in the code that suggests a need to address an average setback line. if fences are to be constructed within the 75 feet setback area, variances would be required. Applicant has advised fencing is not proposed along side lot lines merely landscaping. A variance setback to the lakeshore will be required for rope/post fence along Shoreline Drive because of the angle of the shoreline alp,.g the north and south edges of the property. Planning Commission Recommendation To approve lakeshore setback, side setback, hardcover variances for a new marina structure, accessory structures and site improvements for the property located at 1955 Shoreline Drive based on the following hardshiis and findings: a) Hardships - .1. The lot is not deep or large enough to allow structures meet required setbacks. 2. The majority of the property is located within the lakeshore protected area where no hardcover or structure is allowed. b) Findings - 1. The property has been ufpd as a commercial marina for over 40 years and was recently rezoned to B-2 in 1975. 2. The proposed improvements provide a reduction of 10% in overall hardcover in addition to improvinq quality of storm water runoff prior to entering lake. Zoning Files #1092, 1112, 1.142 May 20, 1987 Page 8 of 15 3. The majority of improvements provide for a major reduction in hardcover immediately adjacent to shoreline. 4. Access to site and parking areas have been greatly improved with proposed single structure making for a more efficient use of the severely limited land area. The following conditions apply to this approval: 1. Parking areas to be paved and stalls designated. 2. irainage and storm water runoff treatment to be installed at time of the restoration of the eroding shoreline. 3. Existing dock section located above the 929.4 through 931 elevation to remain until the time of the shoreline restoration - owner to apply for building permit with penalty fee. 4. Applicant to execute a developer's agreeme and post letter of credit to insure the following improvements -e installed by August 31, 1988: a) Drainage/surface water treatment elan. b) Paving of parking area and installation of grassed area. c) Reconstruction of dock adjacent to shoreline - areas of dock located above 929.4 elevation not to exceed 6 feet in width. d) Erosion control installation during construction phase of principal struct»re and shoreline restoration period. Council Action - To provide staff with conceptual direction in order to draft an appropriate resolution for action at your June 8th meeting. uaLe Rec'a ' Fee 300 , nQ Receipt_ Initials . 1- CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Please check one - Is the property abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone ( home ) Name zo Phone (work) Address S3 a _;-z; City: 4 =�X('. Zip; --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name 1Phone (work) Address:City: Zip Date Property Acquired /_ %:;.� r'S' (month/year) wbwrk I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Re Aential Other (specify) ------------------- .------------------ -------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot. Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances ( ✓ Front Side a Rear) Other HARDSHIP Describe undue hard_.,.p or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners Lies of owners within 150' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin Count!./ Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat Map. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant nereoy agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct. to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signatur Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council men,be,-s for purposes of investi.ga- tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature: Date Applicant must have all submittals into the C,ty offices 25-days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commi lion Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planni.nq Commi:.ei.on and Council, and, if an applicant is unable to attErid a vcheclulcd meetinq, to please make arrange- ments to have tin authorized agent attend .in your place and to advise the Buildinq G Zoning Office of this c-han(je prior to the meeting. 38 10-117-23 31 C001 GEORGE F ROVEGNO 2U10 SVCRELINF ORI VE WAYZATt MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 COBS DANI E L CRE AR 1980 SPATES AVF 6AYZATt MN 55391 38 10-117-23 42 C005 A G ASCHENBECK JR 1930 SHORELINE DRIVE WAYZATA MN 55351 38 1C-117-23 42 0015 H TOURANGEAU 206U SPATES AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 1C-117-23 42 0022 CRAIG OLSON 1960 SHORELINE OR WAYZATA MN 55391 • •s 38 10- 117-23 31 OCCB FARIETTA H ANDERSON 2055 SPATES AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0095 TERRY C MORSE 2C80 SPATES AVE CRONO MN 55391 :8 10- 11 7-23 42 0012 E ROEI E WAYNE 5CC9 EXCELSIOR ELVD APT 126 ST L GU IS PARK MN 55416 :6 1C-117-23 42 OU17 LYLE vil(KERPAN 4.. I NTE PLACHEN LA FXCE LS ICR P� 55331 38 IU- 11 7-23 31 OG02 J CHN T SPF. NCF ' o*' 2U40 �O SHCRF DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-2.3 31 OC90 F.ICHAFD V STINSON 2040 SPATFS AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 42 0007 AL AN NFTTL ES 6 ANNE NETTLES 1940 :HORELINE OR ORONO MN 55351 38 10-117-23 42 0016 RONAL C J PR INEAS 1580 HERITAGE OR WAYZATA MN 55391 - - t TOTAL LABFLS BATCH 003 00017 38 10-117-23 31 uUo4 STATE LAND DEPT 38 10-117-23 31 UU90 HARRI ET SPA' ES TORANGE4U 2060 SPATES AVE WAYZATA MN 55351 3d 10-117-23 42 J014 SAILGRS WORLD B CX 176 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55321 38 10-117-23 42 JJzl CANIEL CRFAR IS80 SPATES AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 f •�•� �j N Ica � 1 I Lo JVU LIT Lot 0 8�� - __ � . " ~ � � +� ^, - � / ^~_ ~~~ ' / r��^` �� ~~ ~~� ~�� , -_ �� _�' � / / ^^ ��_-��. ~~~~ �~ / / `^ -- -- ~-- ~�p� ~~---- -�^ ~__ -~~-~~~- / / �� ._-� / -^ ^~ ~~ �� -~�-�-~~ __-__ ~~~��- -- - / / _~_- �~�� -- - _' / / / _~ _ � '/ y � ' �. _ ' -- v aGC/lod� GC7 ATE G�/I.O T �42E v 5 Gt��TN /`S U5J%7 A5 AA-)� A c5=-► �A-Gl� tiA7Lr A-n�CE- '�A �5'0 -CT �cc_ 7J �ticT— 'Tc t�2- %Q«ao• s , .41A R, Al A C44, cf- �j �A2�T AKEiZ Ate- '/ 5 AAdD (.�U2T15'7 S A7- ,--6A4- L�u3..6V,51 - Az *,a A�1,C-e- �v� � I�•�.� ��2c� �' ftrn. i c� /o��. �-,. 5c., ter. TH,�J -Z7 � s A— ^J 1 "uornos &ASSCNja-m3 Urban anti Regional Research and Planning DATE: April 22, 1987 TO: Jean Mabusth City of Orono FROM: Bob Wuornos RE: Smith Bay Marina Site Plan Pursuant to our discussion of March 27, 1987, we are providing the City of Orono with a revised site plan for the Marina property and two lots along the west side of County Road 15. Please note the following changes: A. Marina Parcel Existing - Proposed Setback from Lakeshore (929.4) Undefined 15' Building Setback from Lake (929.4) 9' 50` Settuaek from Lot Line 0-10, 10, Total Area 1,1, q. ft. 31,117 sq. ft. Structures 2,07E 5i. ft. 1,258 sq. ft. Total Hardcover '3,528 sq. ft. 20,962 sq. ft. % Hardcover 37% 67% Green Space 3,908 sq. ft. 10,155 sq. ft. Parking Spaces 41 42 B. Transmission Boat Parking Park i ng Tot,!l Arf:,a I(?,?31 s ft. '0,73I sq. ft. owildiny sq. ft. 1,ZSi sq. ft. B. Transmission Site (con'd) Total Hardcover % Hardcover• Setbacks: Front Side Rear C. Parkin Lo, (Grand Avenue and County Road 15) Total Area Building Coverage Total Hardcover % Hardcover Setbacks: Front Side Rear RLW/bjk cc: Geraid Tobermdn Woody Love APR ? 4 � iI Existing Proposed._ 7,024 sq. ft. 7,799 sq. ft. 55.5% 72.6% , 14,569 sq. ft. 2,516 sq. ft. 3,867 26.5% 14' 0' 5' 10' 10' 5' & 10, 14,569 sq. ft. 0 sq. ft. 9,005 68% 10' 10, 10, l-.I- r__ 3.02, Subd. 6 Rev. 12-23-82 Subd. 6. Extensions. No multiple dock or mooring area or commercial dock shall extend across the extended zone line between sites zoned differently by a municipality. (As Amended Ord . No . 18 , Sec . 3 ) Ear .- ,..4,'11 1 Subd. 7. Unusual Confi urations. Where the provisions of this ordinance would cause the authorized dock use area of two or more sites to overlap, or where there is any other unusual con- figuration of shoreline or extended lot lines, which causes a conflict between the owners of two or more adjacent or nearby sites as the use of the same area of the lake for docks, mooring areas or other structures or for reasonable access thereto, the owner of any of the affected sites may apply to the Board for a variance pursuant to Section 3.04. A variance may be (a) to permit the applicant to locate a dock, mooring area or other structure in a location different from that permitted by this ordinance or (b) to permit or require the owner r'' any adjacent or nearby site to do so. Subd. 8. Docks: Dimension Limits. A dock as defined in Section 3.01, Subdivon 2, may exceed six feet, excluding posts, in either its length or width, but not both; provided, however, that docks which are in existence on June 30, 1982 and which are in compliance with all the provisions of the LMCD Code other than this Section 3.02, Subd. 8 shall be allowed to con- tinue in :heir present form without expansion or modification until such time as such docks are replaced or until 507. or more of any such doc'.. is damaged or destroyed. (As amended, Ord. No. 12, Sec. 2; Ord. No. 55.) Subd. 9. Shoreline Requirements. a) No new docks or moor- ing areas other than commercial docks shall be constructed or established which provide space for or are used for mooring or docking a greater number of watercraft than one for each 50 feet of continuous shoreline in existence on May 3, 1979. When mea- sur-�ments determining the number of watercraft allowed result in the provision of a fractional watercraft, any fraction up to and including one half (1/2) shall be disregarded, and fractions over one half (1/2) shall allow one additional watercraft. (As Amended Ord. No. 40) b) Four or fewer watercraft may be kept at any dock or mooring facility which is otherwise in compliance with this code and with the requirements of the local )and use c:ontro.i authority and which is locatc,d on a :..ite which i:., in existence on Auqu`.t: 30, 1978. -T HENNEPIN LFU May 1.1987 DE-PARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 320 Washington Av. South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468 935-3381 TTY 935-64 33 Mr. Micheal Gaffron Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator City of Oronn Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN. 55323 Dear Mr. Gaffron: RE: Proposed Site Plan - Smith's Bay Marina CSAH 15 Both sides - between Spates Ave. & Grand Ave. Section 10, Township 117, Range 23 Hennepin County No. 1525 Review and Recommendations We reviewed the above site plan and make the following comments: - For future improvements to this segment of CSAH 15 the developer should dedicate an additional 7 feet of right of way along each side of CSAH 15 making the right of way 40 feet each way from the center of CSAH 15. - The developer, must submit a detailed grading and drainage plan showing how all on site storm drainage will be controlled. Contact. Jim Ault, Hennepin County Hydraulics Engineer for details. - The two proposed access points to CSAH 15 from the Clubhouse area are acceptable to Hennepin County. - All access to the Boat Retail and Service Center must be via the existing municipal sti-ePts as shown. No direct access from this part of the site to CSAH 15 will be permitted by Hennepin County. - Any revision to an existing access or a change in land use requires an approved Hennepin County entrance permit before beginning any construction. Contact our Maintenance Division for entrance permit forms. HENNEPIN COUNTY M. Gaffron May 1, 1987 Page 2 - All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved utility permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Contact our Maintenance Division for utility permit forms. - The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within County right of way. Please direct any response or questions to Les Weigelt. Sincerely, David W. Schmidt, P.E. Transportation Planning DWS/LDW:lw cc R. L. Wuornos & Associates Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 612.636-4600 May 14, 1987 Citv of Orono Box ( 5 Crystal Bay, KN 55323 Attn: Ms. Jeanne `iabusth Re: File No. 139-1142 Smith Bay 'farina Dear Jeanne, I Engineers & Architects Urm G lh,nruron. P I. Rohm/ W. Rwrnr, I' L Au ph C. Andrrl,A. P L. RrodJwd A. I —0—g. P. E. Richard L. Tamer, P.E. Jamn ('. (Jhun. P.E. Glenn R C MA. P F Arah A. Gwrhm. PI I h.~ L. Aurrs, Pt Ru h✓rd N'. hntrr, Y.E. Not G. 3. harm hr. I' E .N- n L. S,rnuiu. P t. Mr.AldC. Ra,gardr, P.E. Jerry A Ruardun. P E. Mark A. Hart ✓ . P E, Ted h. told, P.F .W. hurl I Rumrnunn, P L NuMor M PJrJJrrlr, PC LWn10 LmA um, PE TAunras N' /'rrmun, Y.E. Ala hurl C. Lynch. P E Aurrn L. N dh., PC. Janes N .Noland. P E. ArnnrrA P Anderson, P.E. A"M A Na<hnrunn, P.E. AIurA R. htd1j, P E. Rulon C. Rawk, A I.A. Thumal E. AnXas, P.E. A. oil 1. YvanA, 11 L. Charles A t rn A sun I.— At Pa.rhAy Harden A/. Ohun Jumn AI. EDrrlrn We have reviewed the site plan submitted on the Smith Bay area. The plan as submitted is acceptable with provisions added for controlling the site runoff. We have shown a preliminary layout for controlling the runoff with filter drain outlets into Lake Minnetonka. This is not the only option but an ex- ample of what we would recommend. The developer should develop his own silta- tion basin and outlet controls along with hydraulic calculations. The plan should then be submitted to the 4innehaha Creek Watershed for approval. The parking lot layout will allow for adequate movement through the site. We have shown 2"' turning radi on the plan hich would be more than necessary for the average vehicle. We would expect that most boat launchings will occur at off peak hours and be compl-ted by the operator. The parking areas should be surfaced with materials other than lime rock. The -,k surfacing creates a dust which silts up the grass ponding areas. The ing lots should be constructed with a porous paving block if hardcover is kern. The parking lots should be pave, with bituminous surfacing if the lardcover is not a problem. If you have any questioner, pl(?ast contact this office. Yours very truly, 90'41,S'TR00, RI)SENE, NNDERL,TK 5 ASS')CIATES, INC. "lens R. Cook GRC, 1 i 377,e RE: FILE NO. TO: FILE. NOTES: M E M 0 BONESTR00, ROSENF., ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36 St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 Date: By' — ,4t' 13 wmmwlr,- St. Oviek A," ry 0K k h '0 b vo ff-L-F---7 I`167 !=1 1I'milill!l 11, 1 ol =,'I t 4 a tt� i I�10, �D Form Ten CA- 6� Round Arm Mount �l Form Ten CA. Gardco CA round fum, nmresaccommodale the patented ' Form Ten Sharp cutoff optical system, and therefore direct a higher percen Woe of oultnil lumens onto (Jeslred areas than any other IyI-)e Of round 1 lumrnalre The Cylindrical shape with its low profile forms a sofl silhouette that sug Bests uses where the lighting plan brings luminaires closer to eye level T he luminaires accept energy efficient HID lamps frorn 70 to 400 w;itls Configurations I �J v L Distribution Patterns/ Typ(: F ,vj ..� Type VS' Li (22" only) Ordering Information Prefix S.ze CA 17 ' Configuration TReflector 1 1 Volts - 120 Lam; Fin,sh Refer to CA 22'. 2 4 1 3 i O 208 240 113FIP Lamp I BLP Selector I FM 2,7 L. ff I VS 48 - --- - --1 Lamp Selector CAII CA_22 _ 70W HPS 25OW HPS f 00W HPS 25OW MV IOOW MV 25OW MH I SOW HPS• 40OW HPS 175W MV 40OW MV 175W MH 40OW MH 25OW MH 'Suppked with ballast looperate 55 volt lamp unim spncdted o*ww,.,e I ' k (6 { _ ----1 1 Example Reflector Types -- - ---Primary Ballast Voltage Configuration Lamp Site , Finish Prehx � Options CA 22 2 3 120 40OMH BAP FW*h: BRP - Bronze Painted BL P = Black Painted Lamp Abbreviations MV = Mort: rry Vapor HPS - High Pnmun Sodium MH - Metal Halide 0060m: F = Fusing POLY = Polycarhonale Lens No1aa: I VS Rnfleckx (22" Onh) A sag ;xlycarbonale tens is standard when ',,I- V`., erotical System 4 specified Dimensional Data GA 1 I CA ?l A (, -arm Nth -dig Lull. q 0 1101-4 to 01 klo ao): @ "n A 0) Ohl orz)a. -4-rnl-Acc 1p"o OR* In - WOJ MAWZ) d- h-rGj d- 99-4 4 J (.-WXo Tpj� i W ffi6 f A- h- a(d) nV t4 6 jr ,3�Wt TWO1 qhl COW W I hfd j t i to) Cod 46 1 9 JU i rO -U I -n O'� C:e FM / - r w . MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING IIE=.t :\Y 4, 1987 #11.42 SMITH BAY MARINA 6 YACHT CLUB 1955 SHORELINE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 7:56-8:29 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Present for this matter were Gerald Toberman and Woody Love. Zoning Administrator Mabusth reviewed the major upgrading plan of the entire B-2 property. The proposal includes a single 30'x40' principal structure (club mouse) surrounded by a 10' deck area on the northeast and southeast sides, with a 6' walkway extending to docks on the northeast end and a 4' walkway extending to the docks on the southeast. She reviewed the variances required of which all were either no charge or less intense that the existing conditions. In response to Chairman Kelley's question regarding the status of the docks permit with the LMCD - Mr. Love stated the only outstanding issue is the removal of bouys and conversion of slips being discussed with the City and the location of slips being negotiated with the LMCD . Chairman Kelley reviewed the following variances for Planning Commission continents: Lakeshore Setback - Principal structure = 50' - variance of 25' Deck structure = 15' - variance of 60' Side Setback to Residential Useu Property - Principal structure = 40' - variance of 10' Hardcover - 0-75' = 15,862 s.f. variance of 63.4% (10% improvement in hardcover) 75-250' = 5,100 s..f. (no change from existing) Lot Area = .71 Acre - variance of 1.3 acres Setback for Parking from Street Lot Lire - Proposed = 10' - variance of 20' Parking Requirements (6 stalls per 10 slips) - Based on 79 slips = 48 stalls required Proposed = 42 stalls - variance of 6 stalls *Note: The Citv h-s always permitted this marina to use the ..a i parking lot on weekends for overflow parking. Chairman Kelley stated that he felt comfortable with approving the variances. Taylor agreed with Chairman Kelley because in each instance they have either maintained the existing � -fiance or imr,roved the existing condition. i MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COW-IISSION MEETING IiELD 11AY 4, 1987 11142 SMITH BAY MARINA CONTINUED Bellows feels this is an appropriate use and finds no problems in terms of setback. She however, feels the parking is too tight for proper maneuverability. Additionally, she felt that the Planning Commission could not make a recommendation until a complete plan for the new club house is submitted. She suggested that the Planning Commission proceed with the other issues and conceptually approve the footprint. Councilmember Callahan stated that the Council will not review this application further until an entire commercial site plan has been submitted. In response to Chairman Kelley's question, Mr. Love stated the specific rip -rap plan to protect the shoreline is not available at this time. Chairman Kelley stated that plans pertaining to the shoreline should be submitted with the commercial site plan. Planning Commission discussed allowing a caretaker apartment above the club house. Planning Commission recommended that a caretaker be on site - possibly for the summer months only. Harriet Tourangeau, 2060 Spates Ave., asked about the status of an overflow parking lot on the 1950 Shoreline Drive resit .ntial property. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the issue of permitting a parking lot on that property has been tabled by Council ponding the commercial site plan. At this time, the overflow parking will be permitted in the municipal parking lot on weekends. Mr. Toberman stated that with the current proposal, an overflow parking area may never be needed. There were no other comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Taylor, to recommend conceptual approval of the variances required with exception of the variance to the required 48 parking stalls. Motion, Ayes 5, t.ays 0. Abstention 1. Cohen abstained. Zoning Files #1092, 1112 & 1142 May 20, 1987 Page 9 of 15 Area 2 - 1960 Shoreline Drive (Tonka Transmission) List of Exhibits Exhibit 2-A - Application Exhibit 2-B - Property Owners List Exhibit 2-C - Plat Map Exhibit 2-D - Planning Commission Minutes of 3/16/87 Exhibit 2-E - Applicant's Addendum Exhibit 2-F - Resolution No. 961 Exhibit 2-G - Site Plan - Comprehensive Use Exhibit 2-H - Site Plan as an Independent Operation Exhibit 2-I - Hardcover Facts Exhibit 2-1 - Neighbors' Letters Exhibit 2-K - Planning Commission Minutes of 5/4/87 History of Property Prior to 1978, the easterly 70 feet of the property was zoned B-1 (Commerical). The City rezoned the B-1 portion of the property to LR-1.A in November of 1978 and concurrent with that rezoning adopted Resolution No. 961 (Exhibit 2-F), establishing a lawful non -conforming commercial use on the now totally zoned residential property. The service station/car repair use has existed in one form or another up to 1001 when Craig Olson was granted a conditional use permit for the additioi: c_unsmission repair use. Intent of Rest, ution #961 & Non -Conforming Use Standards - The resolution establishing the legal non -conforming use of the property specifically spelled out limits and guidelines for the continued service station use but Item 6 of Section IV of that resolution notes the following: "6. Other uses may be considered by the Council upon application and upon a finding that the proposed use is less non -conforming than the above permitted uses." This section has been the basis for similar applications that sought to change the approved use to another commercial or non -conforming use. Paul Fahl in, a previous applicant, sought to relocate his bait shop operation to the subject property and maintain the gas sales. The application was denied because of the multiple uses proposed with the operation (gas station - bait shop - boat rental). In 1933, Council granted a conditional use permit to Craic! Olson to allow the use to expand to limited transmission repair use. The limited transmision repair use was deemed compatible with service station use that had always existing on the property. Note that Council also responded to the economic pressures brought on by the oil crunch during that period of time for all independant small operators. Another big factor was that the neighborhood wanted the service station use to remain. Zoning Files #1092, 1112 & 1142 May 20, 1987 Page 10 of 15 Subdivision A of the non -conforming use section clearly states that one non -conforming use cannot be changed to another and yet Subdivision J would advise Council that they not unreasonably require strict compliance to standards A-1 and will look favorably on granting variances when dealing with a property that contains a legal non -conforming use. Background on Leasee Gary DeSantes of Sailors World will lease the property from the applicant for the boat sales/nautical shop use. The applicant, Smith's Bay Yacht & Marina, Inc., shall be considered the responsible agent for the operation - the conditional use permit will be issued to the owner - any violation or concern regarding the property must be addressed by the owner/applicant. Commercial Site Plan Review Access/Parking - Review Exhibits 2-G & 2-H There is no specific standard for a residential district regarding commercial uses - staff recommends using the standard for the principal use (sales and service center). In this specific case, 8 stalls would also be required for commercial/retail use in the B-2 zone (lakeshore commercial). Area of Structure = 1,170 s.f. 1. Per B-2 standards (Section 10.41, Subdivision 5B) 8 stalls required 2. Per Section 10 51, Subdivision 10 (0) - Retail Sales and Service Establishments 1 stall per 150 s.f. of net floor area 1,170 - 150 = 7.8 or 8 stalls The setback for parking area adjacent to streets is 20 feet, although City regularly grants 10 feet setbck variances to crowded Navarre business sites. A 10 feet setback has been provided. The curb cut on Shoreline Drive has been closed off. Access to site i s limited to one access off Spates Avenue. The sine plan (Exhibit 2-G) proposed by applicant would function if the through traffic to 1950 Shoreline Drive parking lot access drive is realized. Staff's review must be limited to the independent use of the transmission property. The diagonal parking stalls will not work with the single access - no room to maneuver a turnaround function. Cook has r.eeesigned a parking plan for both cars and boats, review Exhibit 2-H. Zoning Files #1092, 1112 & 1142 May 20, 1987 Page 1 '. of 15 Boat Parking - Use of Interior of Structure DeSantes has asked for 7 boat parking stalls for display purposes. The Planning Commission has recommended the following limitations: Stalls 1-4 limited to 25 feet length - no masts allowed. Stalls 5-7 shall not exceed 20 feet - no masts allowed. The interior of the building will not sustain structural changes - basic clean up of the interior. The existing office area will also serve as office area for boat sales operation and garage stall area will serve sales display - storage of service parts. Boats will not be repaired on site. Landscaping The staff sketch (Exhibit 2-H) proposes a 5 feet lu.idscape buffer along the east side of property in addition to a privacy fence up to a 30 feet setback line and at that point continues with a 3�' fence up to right- of-way line. The privacy fence should be continued along the rear lot line until it connects to existing privacy fence. Owner along rear lot line does not want the existing privacy fence extended to Spates Avenue but would prefer plantings. The City shall work with applicant to provide appropriate plantings adjacent to the lift station and meter area within 10 feet wide grass buffer area. The applicant proposes a post and rope fence along the front lot line adjacent to Shoreline Drive not to exceed a 3Y height. The County Highway Department does not wart planting within the bituminous curbed island area located within right-of-way of road. They prefer crushed rock to discourage such plantings, the r-ason being to protect sighting at the intersection. Staff would recommend that the green area adjacent to Spates Avenue and Shoreline Drive remain as grassed areas once again to assure no sighting problems within the 30' setback line at intersection. The applicant's engineer shows an increase in hardcover of 7%. Staff has amended the proposal by adding 325 s.f. of additional landscape areas along the east lot line - hardcover would be at 69.6 s.f. for an overall increase of 4.1 %. Drainage The Hennepin County Highway representative has asked that surface runoff from property be retained on property and allowed to enter catch basin on west. side of County road right-of-way at a more controlled graduated rate. The County advised that the grassed area adjacent to roadway could be slightly bermed to control runoff to road. The City has had major problems with drainage collections adjacent to catch basin. Applicant should provide a drainage plan for approval by the City and MCWD. The drainage improvements shall be covered under the required Developer's Agreement with appropriate security posted to insure completion. Zoning Files #1092, 1112 & 1142 May 20, 1987 Page 12 of 15 Signage and Lighting As applicant's addendum advises the present sign on building will be utilized and the road sign removed. The applicant has submitted information on the lighting, Exhibit 1-L, with the review of the marina operation - the same type of lights will be used. The site plan shows the location of all. proposed lights. All lighting will be shielded from residential lot lines as required by the Code. Required Removal of Underground Gas Tanks - Connection to Municipal Sewer The underground gas tanks shall be removed in addition to another underground tank used by the transmission shop for storage of used fluids/oils from repairs of vehicles. The standards of the Uniform Fire Code shall be enforced. The applicant must connect to municipal sewer at the same time underground tanks are removed. The current owner of the property, Craig Olson, has executed permanent access and utility easements for maintenance of lift station and adjacent sewer lines. Planning Commission Recommendation To approve a conditional use permit for Smith Bay Yacht & Marina, Inc. to permit the leasing of the property to Sailors World to operate a boat/nautical sales and service center use on the residential zoned property located at 1960 Shoreline Drive; per Resolution No. 961 the proposed change in non -conforming use has been found to be less intense or non -conforming" than the existing transmission repair/gas station use based on the following findings: 1. The proposed use creates less demands on the severely limited site. 2. The external appearance and principal use of the property is more compatible with surrounding residential neighborhood and existing legal lakeshore commercial uses of adjacent marina. 3. Adajcer;t neighbors have been notified of the proposed change in use and none have submitted written objections. 4. The surrounding property owners support the less intense use as long as boat repairs are not performed on site nor excessive storage of boats allowed in open yard areas. 5. The approved site plan for the use will preserve adequate sighting distance at the adjacent. intersection. Zoning File #1092, 1112 & 1142 May 20, 1987 Page 13 of 15 6. The proposed use and concurrent site improvements will have a positive effect on the property values of surrounding residences. The following conditions apply to this approval: 1. Applicant to work with City staff and Hennepin County to develop an on site surface drainage plan for property. 2. Applicant to work with City to provide appropriaLe natural screening adjacent to lift station and within rear yard green space area. 3. Applicant to provide landscape improvements as follows: a) If through traffic lane is not realized, the side yard adjacent to 1950 Shoreline Drive to be buffered by 5 feet of landscaping and privacy fencing up to 30 feet street setback at which point a 3�' fence shall continue to street right-of-way. Existing privacy fence to be repaired. b) No plantings within County right-of-way nor grassed buffer area adjacent to Spates Avenue and Shoreline Drive. c) Connect privacy fence to existing fence along rear lot line along northeast portion of property lire. 4. Installation of amended parking plan providing 8 passenger vehicle parking stalls and 7 spaces for boats as follows: a) Spaces 1 through 4 limited to larger boats not in excess of 25 feet - no masts to be installed. b) Spaces 5 through 7 limited to smaller boats not in excess of 20 feet - no masts to be installed. 5. Signage to be limited to existing building signs - lighting shall be shielded from all lot lines - post fire lane with signage on east side of building. 6. Applicant to execute a developer's agreement and post a letter of credit to assure the following site improvements: a) Removal of underground gas tanks per standards of Uniform Fire Code and underground tank to east of building used to store oil, etc., wastes from transmission repair operation. h) Removal of pump island. c) Installation of drainage improvements as approved by City. d) Installation of landscaping improvements as set forth above. Council Action - To give conceptual direction to staff so that staff may prepare an appropriate resolution for formal action at your June 8, 1987 meeting. C I Ty OF bRono GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION ----------------------------------------- ---------------t2�_.�-__ _1 q PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 1960 SHORELINE DRIVE Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 10-117-23-420022 Please check - Is the property abstract or X torrens? (for Conditional Use Applications only) Please attach legal description to application if not inclnd 3 on required s,irvey. ' Lot 2, Block 1, Tourangeau Addition ---------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Name SAILOR'S WORLD, INC. Phone 473-7525 Mailing Address Box 17b Crystal Bay, MN 55323 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER Name Craig Olson _ Phone Mailing Address 1960 Shoreline Drive Date Property Acquired May / 1993 (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use $150.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f) Land Alteration Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Seawall., i-taini.ng walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250. 00 Vacation $150.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation with Suhdivis:on OTHER APPLICATIONS - CONT. $250.00 Rezoning $200.00 Appeals X Other - see fee schedule -------------------------------------•-------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) j�,�;-hio,� Q,£r�i� ;kof --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Cernter 348-3271) 3. Stamped, legal. sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above lis ith no return address. 4. Certificate of surv..y. (,J/oprozjo 5. Construction plan, if applicable. 6. Plat Map. The apple and Property Owner must sign this application. Plea,e remember t, it application is not complete if the above information has not been ir: '. APPLICANT'S : TURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied .is true and correc to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Da te. _ /p/ 12- UP OWNERS SIGNATURE "'I ^ owner hereby ackr ledg s and agrees to this application and further autiorizeu reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Counci I members for ri..irposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature h:..te %U e:.:. �4, --------------------------- All — --------------------------------------------- Apf,l icant atust have all submittals into, the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commisrion Meetinqs are held on the third Monday of each month. r- 3.8 10-117-23 31 COC1 GEORGE F ROVEGNO 2010 SFGRELINF DRIVE WAYZAII' MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 CC8S DANI E L CRE AR 198U SPATES AVF MAY ZAT t MN 55391 38 10-117-23 42 C005 A G ASCHENBECK JR 1930 SHORELINE DRIVE hAYZATA MN 55391 38 1C-117-23 42 0015 H TOURANGEAU 2060 SPATES AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 1C-117-23 42 0022 CRAIG OLSON 1960 SHORELINE OR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 OCC8 MARIETTA H ANDERSON 2055 SPATES AVE MAYZATA MN 55?91 38 10-117-23 31 0095 TERRY C MORSE ?_C80 SPA'-IES AVE CPONO MN 55351 38 10- 117-23 42 0012 E RO EI E hAYNE 5CC9 EXCELSIOR ELVD APT 126 ST LCU IS PAkK MN ti5416 .b 1C-117-23 42 U017 LYLE V'CKEPNAN I NTE F L ACHEN LA FXCE LS ICk Ph 55331 38 IU- 11 7-23 31 0002 J CHN T SPF. NCF 2040 f O SHCRF DR V` WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 MC R ICHA FD V STI NSON 2040 SPATFS AVE '%AYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 42 0007 AL AN NETTLES 6 ANNE NETTLES 1940 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55351 38 10-117-23 42 0016 RONAL C J PR INEAS 1980 HERITAGE OR WAYZATA MN 55391 TOTAL LAEFLS BATCH 003 00017 38 10-117-23 31 uJov STATE LAND DEPT 38 10-117-23 31 U090 HARRI ET SPATES TORANGEAU 2060 SPATES AVE WAYZATA MN 553SL 36 10-117-23 42 j014 SAILGRS wORLD B CX 176 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55321 38 10-117-23 42 U0 41 CANIEL CRFAR 19'"' SPATES AVE hA _ATA MN 55391 A IV 2P 0 20C 400 r scale L31.r &M, A \- �� 6-NO riN S' 1 CV 4 �` ! � / � �• mod': �~ / I -,`�\ �%' '�3�/ •� (4)++ 'b. /• f �.;.�. arms �rNc..,, Da / MINUTES OF ThE PLANNING: COMMISSION MEETING iIELD MARCH 16, 1967 # 111 1 MART7 NEON CONTINUED Cohen stated he felt the tennis court under the conditional Use permit should be restricted to play until 10:00 P.M. as proposed by applicant. It was moved by Cohen, sr.inded by Johnson, to recommend approval of lot area ai,a lot width variances, average lakeshore setback variance, and conditional use permit for pool and deck tennis court per staff recommendation anti additionclly restrict tennis court play to 10:00 P.i'.. Motion, Ayes 7, Nays 0. #1112 SMITHS BAY MARINA INC. "19607SHORELINL Pi.IVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Present for representing developer; ar.;l World. this matter were: Charlie 17tone, Smiths Bay Marina; Gerald Tc man, Gary DeSantes, former owner of. S or's Zoning Adr-inistrator Mabusth e: in ' *hat the applicant seeks a conditional use permit a less non -conforming use of the p.-of <rxplained the history of the present non -conforming use. The Plan involves public retails sales on the suiaject r-operty and a privat, clubhouse on the Sailor's Wc.rld ropes Y. It does not include any on -site boat repair. They we Id like consideration of some new boat sales. Mr. Stone indicated that they would like up to 10 of the pr -nosed 16 park'.ng stalls for boat use. Bellows ask d if there would bi. enough parking to a-commodate !.he number of r ' s, employeer and tomers. t Stone stated th4 the average marina -se, ever, on paa, '%ys, i s only .)J%. A. Tourangeau, 2"60 SF-.tes Ave., verif _sd triat a maximum of 15 cz r F re pz.rkAd at one time `- icconnelate the existing 79 boat slips. He stated t' fel_ the proposed use would ip a less intense use addition to the use cleaning up the area. Fie 1 lows su,:sr ed that the appropri.itene_ , of ti a use be a,'dressec a. wF.11 as `he intensity of use, fi.nrling that a marina use is a , h more appropriate use on this sMorel i nc, r+roperty thun a trans ,ission shop. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ftEETING HELD MARCH 16, 1987. #13.12 SMITHS BAY MARINA INC. CONTINUED Regarding the issue f pedestrian crossing on County Rd. 15, the representati --es did not feel there would be much pedestrian crossing. Chairman "elley read into the record letters frrLn Alan Nettles, 1940 Shoreline Dri-e, addressing his concerns; and Terry Morse, 208' 3nates Ave, indicating his support of the proposed use. Mary Crear, 1980 Spates Awenu-, stated that she was in favor of the proposed plans nut had concerns regarding the location and number of boats stored, boat repair use, and the amount of blacktop hardcover. They would be ameniable to approximately 4 boats stored on the property. In addition, she would like to see a landscape plan. There were no other comments from the public and the public hearing was ^.losed. The Planning Commission unanimously agreed (except Cohen) that the proposal would not be an intensification of use, and in order to proceed with a recommendation they would need a more detailed commercial site plan. Cohen abstained from commenting and voting on this application because of past dealinga with Gerald Toberman. I'he Planning Commission recommended issues/items/concerns to be addressed in the commercial site plan. It was iioved by Chairman. Kelley, seconded by Johnson, t table Applica4-ion #1112 pending revised site plan. M, .on, Ayes .flays 0, Abstention 1 (Cohen). #1117 WILLy.AD C. SHULL 1125 SPRING HILL ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 9: - 9:38 The 'ffidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was nL"od. Mr. Shull w"s p, .,.r tl matter. Zot,ing Administiw_,;r Mahusth expl,-ined the regaest for hardcover and lakeshore setback variances to construct a track ',-)()at lift. The ramp will consist of a track, six feet wider and fifty feet 1 cng. Approximately 20 feet of track will be on the lan(I portion of the lakeshore. The remaining structure wi 11 cc nsi.st o' a dirt and w; n.ch to C?%ram;.,.. T/2A,vs rvI ssd,✓ Cv�G �� C�o,Jc� �ar'E 2 v 5 /4 �7 ��T!%�L �� �J��s �%c7 ✓�iPli7ef.OG Jc^t'�C�% 50a�p ,¢ L. E- 'TAi�Sc.T 4L c,oc j -A) 2Fs .4.t, ES',es s s /�t'�re,�„ v5� c=U•c� iNUaGL'se� �ct.s CAJ E- 5£ 2Citcf- �lk� AQCA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OPERATION OF A LAWFUL -NONCONFORMING USE OF LAND WHEREAS, the City of Orono, hereina'_ter City, is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono, hereinafter Council, has adopted a Comprehensive Guide Plan which sets ^orth the unique characteristics and constraints affecting development within the City and which Plan establishes goals and guiding principles for planning and reviewing development within the City; and WHEREAS, the Council has adopted a Zoning Code which establishing performance standards and criteria for implementation of the guiding principles of the Comprehensive Guide Plan; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code of the City provides for the continuing use of land or buildings as lawful non -conforming uses whenever such uses were lawful uses under prior zoning regulations but have since become non -conforming uses because of a lawful change in the zoning code; and WHEREAS, the property described below has become a lawful non -conforming use of -and and buildings in the manner described above; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby establishes a Conditional Use Permit for continued lawful use of the following described property according to the following conditions: I. Property Description 1. Legal Description - "part of Lots 24, 25 and 26, "Ora Park" -n Lake Minnetonka and that part of Lake Street lying be rae the extentions of side lines of said Lots 24, 25, and 26, and between frcnt lines of said Lots and Northwesterly line of the Right of Way of County Highway No. 15 (formerly No. 7) being a line parallel to and 33 feet northwesterly from the center line of existing pavement of said Highway", all of which is intended to be replatted as Lot 2, Tourangeau Addition. 2. Lot size: (ave.) 145.58 ft. wide by (ave.) 7.8.55 ft. deep - 11,435 sq. ft. (.26 acre). Resolution No. Page 2 3. Existing st-tictures: One single story masonry gasoline service station ._0 fc. long by 27-1/2 ft. wide (1,311 sq. ft.) consisting of two auto service bays with hoists, one 9 X 12 storeroom, one 10 X 15 office and two toilets; three 3000 gallon underground fuel storage tanks: one fuel pump island with four pumps; one advertising sign base; concrete drives over fuel tanks and at pump island, grovel surface elsewhere. 4. Existing Ownership: Land owned in fce by Harriet Tourangeau; part of the land leased to Robert Reutiman since 1954. Reutiman owns the building. Reutiman's interests sub -leased to Texaco, Inc., in 1963 which leasee'-- use ceased on or about September 23, 1978. II. Existing Use 1.' Since 1963, Texaco, Inc. has subleased station to one or more operators who have used the property for retail gasoline and motor fuel sales, light repair and exhange of parts in motor vehicles. Vehicle service included tune-ups, lubrication, tire repair-, replacement of exhaust systems, engine parts, etc. Sales included gasoline of various glades, tires, batteries, additives, and parts when installed in t?:e vehicles. 2. Miscellaneous sales included vending machine sale of soft drinks and cigarettes. 3. Recent year's use has included hours of operation generally running from 6 or 7 A.M. to 6 or 7 P.M. weekdays, reduced operation Saturdays and no operation on Sundays. 4. Recent year's use has NOT included bulk fuel sales, large truck refueling or repairs, auto body repairs, welding, retail or wholesale auto parts sales, retai'.. or wholesale sales of any other commodity except as noted aiove, or outside storage of parts, equipment or trucks. ),' Resolution No. Page 3 III. Zoning 1. Ordinance 214 adopted November 14, 1978 provided for zoning of this property to LR-lA Sin;T Ile Family Lakeshore Residential consistent with the ad' ig properties (and a portion of this property). 2. Prior to Ordinance 214, a portion of this }property was zoned B-1 Limited Neighborhood Business District. 3. The B-1 zone provides for gasoline service station use by Conditional Use Permit. The LR-lA zone does not allow gasoline service station use except for continuation of the existing use by Conditional Use Permit as a lawful non- conforming use. 4. Even as B-1 zoning, the service station use was non- conforming because of substandard lot size, substandard setbacks and lack of conformance to zoning performance standards. 5. The zoning was planned to be changed from B-1 to LR-lA in 1974 concurrent with adoption of the city-wide rezoning and implementation of the CompreEensive Guido Plan. IV. Conditional Use Permit for Continued Use 1. This permit is issued as an automatic condition of the rezoning occasioned by Ordinance 214. 2. This property may continue to be used for the existing gasoline service station according to Section 31.100 of the zoning code and according to the conditions set forth below. 3. The manner and extent of the use shall be as previously used. 4. The principal business shall be retail motor fuel sales of various grades of gasoline, specifically including diesel fuel and/or gasahol or similar fuels used for motor vehicle propulsion. 5. Accessory business may include other existing uses listed in Section II above. Resolution No. Page 4 IV. Conditional Use Permit for Continued Use (Cont.) 6. Other uses may be considered by the Council upon application and »pon a finding that the proposed use is less non -con r�rming than the above permitted uses. 7. Specifically included in this permit is authority for the following: a) Operation between the hours of 6 A.M. and 10 P.M. daily including Sundays and Holidays. b) Installation of one z:^* 6,000 gallon underground storage tanks, sub; ect to building permit. c) Installation of new or revised pump .E'.ands and fuel pumps, subject to building permit. d) Interior and/or exterior renovation and remodeling of the building, subject to building permit (and Council review of work where required by Ordinance). e) Installation of new advertising signs not to exceed size of prior existing signs. 8. Specifically required L•y this permit as a condition to authorized operation are the following: ✓a) Installation of traffic separation curbing and landscaping shown on the attached plan and required as a condition to subdivision of the property. Work to be completed no late? than July 1, 1979. ✓b) Installation of fencing required by Section 38.501 of the zoning code. Work to be completed no later than July 1, 1979. ? c) Closing of rear station window with masonry (per State Buildinb "ode). Work to be completed prior to building occupancy. d) Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy by the zoning department prior to opening for business. 9- le Resolution No. Page S 9. This permit is subject to revi •��-. uy -ae City Council upon violation of the conditions set fw —n herein or as provided by S,?ctioi. 32.490 of the zoning code. Adopted by the City Council of the Ci.t of Orono at their 7regular meeting on the _ of 19--�-' William B. Van Nest, Mayor A IT4 ST: Walter R. Benson, Clerk/Administrator yo 13 -- — L bF r,� I+ - Spates Avenue -i '0' ` V '�. a .� Z � � •�'\ � �� � !. 0 y� y S Perk��� 20' • G he TAT/pyi 4 1 gates Avenue...______. �--•__ —3, pit qwjornos &_xw.dates Urban and Regional Rest -arch and Planning DATE: April 1987 TO- Jean r, City o` FROM: Bob Wuut: ' RE: Smith Bay Marina Site Piar, Pursuant to our discussion of March 27, 19R7, we are providing the City of Orono with a revised site pl?" For the Marina property and two lots along the west side of County 15. Please note the following changes: A. Marina Parcel Setback from Lakeshore (9')9.4) Buildino Setback from Lake (929.4) Setback from Lot Line Toto i Are: Structures Total Har„ ov• % Hardcover �"/ Greel Space Vv Parking Spaces 0 ansmission Site Boat Parkinn Parking Total A a Building Prea Exi sting Undefined 9' U-10, 31,117 sq. ft. 2,076 sq. i't. 23.5?3 sq. ft. 871 3,90E sq. ft. 43 0 10-17 1rt, 131 sq. ft 1"71? . ft. Proposed 15' 50' 10, 31,117 sq. ft. 1,258 sq. ft. 20,962 sq. ft. F7% 10,159 sq. `t. 4' .t' 7 14 1n,711, sq. ft. tirntr 11 x l West I (MW h ' B. Transmission Site (con'd' Existing Proposed Total Hardcover 7,024 sq. ft. 7,799 sq. ft. % Hardcover 65.5% 72.6% Setbacks: Front 0' 10' Side 0' 10' Rear 5' 5' & 1 0' C. Park�iin99 Lot (Grand Avenue and County Road 15) Total Area 14,569 sq. ft. 14,569 sq. ft. Building Coverage 2,516 sq. ft. 0 sq. ft. Total Hardcover 3,867 9,005 % Hardcover 26.5' 63% Setbacks: Front 14' 10' Side 0' 10' Fear 5' 10' RLW/bjk cc: Gerald Toberman Woody Love TERRY DALE MORSE JeAPJNe A. o,UbLLA -- -0 1 61987 �.rrY Or-DRoNO �uLp,Nb atic.� ZoN1�Cr ADwi1�IJTFt.,--._..J{��! t sAl2 .)EAtNC i Ogvs-ri (-)ND 4'LAoj!p!(r %-twmisslon3: J. wl(( ,vr-t be Ab(e.4, r1lfepb 4Lc YYl�rcln N, Playnitq Cowtn►ISSt�nl ►v1E'P.�i'�h9� c.�ln�% W��t review `�qC. ��iTl1'.S �5ay WAI�r1 NA'S q p p4A4-brj for :;L grvpeN4q currcw+ly Lk-kjIz.PA by �Tcvtk4 raos-- ►kIss 6N. "T�4' s 1e4" is +v< skFvtr+ W q Cu^J41a►J U-W feA►K+I bcl,ny :, a4JcA, a ,S re.fresus 44 Skppbr+ ar fwz� Qr•QeA;Wnt'JJ1S ev.. F .S AJC.. �{�iorce, i�nr!e�►Se d ors n o� �-Wo r 5tALk a My Qc4 s*.•j(i. 1 iS f� ��` a baa-� salfs/rc fti,- bus)"e35 ti ` kis 5-4- "-.0 Kdc cfeA4c 4 4rA4+c, sllAabt4 cAmq wore kArarc4e+t3 -f�mK R fro�iAbj �rQ�S►s'iSSi1f+� tom. I al s� (r1 .eye a baa�; ►�; ! be Voe#os 1 41,,c 44is te4 � IV\ 1"y 4bsrta, MEYER, NJUS, JOHNSON & NETTLES, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW Alan R. Nettles SUITE 1110 Daniel H. Jehnson James M. Njus iCl FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH Neil M. Mever M►NNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 5541 i Carrie L. Hess 612/341.2181 March 11, 1987 Orono City Offices 1"35 S. Brown Road Or:7^,o, Minr-sot.a 55323 Attention: Jean Mabush Cif Counsel: Fred Hollender, P.A. Re: Sailor's World/Smith Bay Yacht Club Application for Changes at the Corner of Spates and County Road 15. Dear Ms. Mabush: I will he out of town for the hearinq, Jut I thought I would briefly make known my concerns regarding the proposed change of the transmission shop and Marina. I am concerned that the use of the transmission shop as a boat dealership and repair s'.op not result in chain link fencing, lights, and signs that would be deterimental. to the residential appearance of the neighborhood, or that permanent zone changes be affected which would allow othar uses that are not strictly regulated to he allowed in. I wish I could attend the meetinq, and welcome the opportunity to hear more about these matters. Sincerely, METER, NJUS, JOHNSON 6 NFTTLFS, P.A. Alan R. Nettles ARN%vh "�_I-,�_ MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 ATTENDANCE 7:30 P.M. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chairman Kelley, Bellows, Taylor, Johnson, and Brown. Cohen arrived at 7:46 P.M. Hanson was absent. The following represented the City staff: Building & 'Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Peterson. Councilmember Callahan was also present #1112 SMITH BAY MARINA & YACHT CLUB 1960 SHORELINE DRIVE CONDITIONAI, USE PERMIT CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Present for this matter were Gerald Toberman and Woody Love. Zoning Administrator Mabusth reviewed that at the March 16, 1987 meeting, Planning Commision unanimously agreed that the proposed boat sales/service center use would be a less intense or less non -conforming use than the existing transmission shop. Planning Commission asked the applicant to submit a more detailed site plan of the operation. She reviewed the two site plans submitted: Exhibit E - Consists of 14 parking stalls and 4 boat parking stalls. This plan would only be possible if there were a through road f rom Spates Ave. to 1950 Shoreline Drive. Exhibit F - Consists of 8 parking stalls and 7 boat parking stalls with access from Spates Ave. only and a landscape buffer along the 1950 Shoreline Drive lot line. At this time, the application deals only with the transmission shop property, not 1950 Shoreline Drive, therefore, Exhibit F is the, plan to be considered. Chairman Kelley asked Zoning Administrator Mabusth to review the ownership history of the property. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that currently R. W. Reutiman is the fee owner and Craig Olson of Tonka Transmission is the Contract for Deed owner and taxpayer. Mr. Toberman has purchased the outstanding contract for deed. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the Hennepin County Highway Dept. has asked that the surface runoff from the property be corrected to be retained on the property and allowed to enter the catch basin on west side of the County road right-of-way alt a more controlled graduated rate. Applicant should provide a drainage plan to address the surface drainage for the site. M-cNUTFS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 111.12 SMITH BAY MARINA CONTINUED Chairman Kelley Basked about the signage, lighting and the hours the center will be open. Zoning administrator Mabusth stated that the signage and lightir-c plan has been submitted. Applicant plans to utilize the present sign on the building and remove the road sign. Lighting will be shielded from residential lot lines as required by code. For more specific information regarding lighting, Mabusth referred to Mr. Love. Mr. Love stated that they plan minimal lighting to meeting the needs for safety and security. Hours of operation are 9 A.M. - 5 P.M. Monday through Saturday, with a possible decrease in hours during the winter. Dan & Mary Crear, 1980 Spates Ave., were present and stated they had no problem with the lighting as long as the C' privacy fence is retained. Their main concern is the hope that the property would be routinely maintained. They are in favor of the proposal.. Mr. Toberman stated that cleaning up the property was their priority intent. In response to Chairman Ke11Py's question,, Mr. Love stated they felt the proposed parking plan would be sufficient. Alan Nettles, 1940 Shoreline Drive, asked what was proposed to be planting within the curbing area along Shoreline Drive. He would like to see some landscaping to present a more rural residential look. Chairwan Kelley stated that the type of landscaping is limited because of the sight distance for the Spates Ave. and Shoreline Drive intersection and also noted that certain types of landscaping could not tolerate the winter road salt. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the county will not allow any plantings within the right-of-way of County Rd. 15. The plan calls for a qrass area with a nautical rope motif. Chairman Kelley asked about the height of the keel boats on trailers (excluding the mast) that will be stored for sale. Mr. Love stated that based on the parking plan for 7 boat stalls, stalls 01-4 maximum boat height would be 14', and stalls 15-7 maximum boat height would be 8'. Boats will be on display uncovered year around. R MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 11112 SMITH BAY MARINA CONTINUED Dan Crear stated that the proposed locations for boat parking would not be a problem. Mary Crear requested that the fence along their lot line be extended to connect with the fence a 1 ony the 1 9 - 0 Sh-ire l i ne Drive lot line, noting that they do not want the the fence along their lot line extended any further towards Spates Ave. than currently exists because it would obstruct their view of the lake. There were no other comments from the public and the: public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Taylor, to recommend approval of the conditional use permit per staff recommendations and subiect to: a) Fence being repaired b) Allowing a maximum of 4 boats 20'-25' to be stored on the property. The remaining 3 boats must be under 20' in length. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0, Abstention 1. Cohen abstained from comment and voting in this application because of his pastdealings with Mr. Toberman, which was consistent with his action at. the March 16, 1957 meeting. Johnson questioned the issue of the County requesting an additional 7' of right-of-way and how it would affect this propisal. Zoning Administrator Mabusth Mated that the City has consistently denied that request because it is at its maximum, as far as the City is concerned, for a scenic highway. Chairman Kelley explained that every time there is a subdivision/application for a property along County Rd. 15, the County request more right-of-way for the future possibility of expanding the road to which the City is opposed. George Rovegno, 2010 Shoreline Drive, arrived after this public hearing was over. He wanted it noted that it appeared to him to be d use variance which is i 1 legal according to code. Chairman Kel ley advised Mr. Rovegno to attend the May Council meeting in which this application will again be discussed. 3 Zoning Files #1092, 1112 & 1142 May 20, 1987 Page 14 of. 15 Area 3 - 1950 Shoreline Drive (Robie Wayne Property) List of Exhibits Exhibit 3-A - Existing Use Sketch Exhibit 3-B - Proposed Parking Site Plan Exhibit. 3-C - Planning Commission Minutes of 11./17/86 Exhibit 3-D - Planning Commission Minutes of. 1/20/87 Exhibit 3-E - Planning Commission Minutes of 2!17/87 Exhibit 3-F - Blatz Memo of 4/13/87 Review of Application The applicant has asked the City to consider a parking lot use of the property at 1.950 Shoreline Drive. The site plan for the 14,569 s.f. of residential zoned property shows a 27 stall parking lot with a 10 feet wide grabL�ed buffer with plantings adjacent to residential zoned properties. A berm of 3 feet height has been proposed along Shoreline Drive side. The applicant was advised that the proposed use is not permitted in a residential district and would require an amendment of the code. An amc,►dment was reviewed by the Planning Commission at two meetings (review Txhibit 3-C & 3-D), and the final draft denied at the Planning Commission, meeting of 2/17/87. Final draft presented for Planning Commission action: Parking Lot - Parking area for the exclusive of the daytime customer parking of an adjacent authorized use. The properties shall not be divided by a public right-of-wa,', and shall be regally combined under sing'..e owriersh.ip. ncc- parking lo.. must have direct access to a public road. A 10 feet wide landscape buffer consisting of evergreens, at a minimum planting height of 4 feet, shall be planted along all side,: of the parking area adjacent to residential used or residential zoned properties. A fence, not to exceed 3� feet in height, shall be installed around the entire parking area just to the inside of the landscape buffer with a device/barrier to control access when lot is closed vo public during non -daytime hours. The lot shall be used solely for the parking of passenger vehicles (having a capacity of not more than nine persons per vehicle). Trucks, boats, trail,�rb, and other motorized or non -motorized vehicles sha 1 1 not be p►.. Ked or stored in the lot. Overnight parking is not allowed. defign standards for the parking area shell be determined by the principal use served except that signage shall not exceed a 3 feet height. The City Attorney in her memo nc.tFs the fo11cwinq is required to amend the code: Zoning Files #1092, 1112 & 1.142 May 20, 1987 Page 15 of 15 "The only permissible way for the City to allow a parking lot in a residential zone is to amend the City Code to allow parking lots as a permitted or a conditional use. If this is the decision of the City Council, it should be noted that the conditional use section allows the City to attach any reasonable condition to the granting of a conditional use. Given the concern of the City relative to the allowance of parking lots in residential districts, it may be in the City's best interest to prescribe in the Code very definite and restrictive conditions surrounding the granting of parking lot conditional use permit. For example, the City could establish criteria which would state that. the parking lot could not exceed a certain size, would need to be landscaped in a certain manner, and would have to meet setback requirements over and above that required for other uses. The establishment of such conditions in the Code would serve the purpose of limiting the application for parking lot conditional use permits in the future." The applicant has restated again for the record that the parking use of this properly is not an integral part of the Marina operation. The fact that boat storage would not be allowed in the parking area at off sea: :)n times (fall/winter) has become a major consideration. They may not be interested in the property at least for the present time. Council may wish to ask the applicant for more background on this issue. In light of recent discussions regarding the Highway 12 Corridor, the parking lot conditional use permit may provide other innovative land use alternatives for unsewered, residential. zones. It is interesting to note for the Council that the City had granted a conditional use permit for overflow parking of approximately 21 cars on the adjacent residential property of windward Mzrine. This is not legal according to your current code - the City would have to amend its code to allow this use to continue. Council Action - Options a) To deny the proposed amendment that would allow Commercial Parking areas in residential zone. or b) To give staff conceptial direction to prepare a formal amendment of the code subject to the following additions or alterations to staff amendment: 1) limit size of parking area 2) more restrictive setbacks standards than recos+ssended 10 feet green space buffer. N Po •�\ tQ 3 THIS BE�H "z9 es E ^� NICOOFIJ D D I a U J ! e" ae r `� r 40. S U► � 0 46 a 14 MA Iri i +.,�_ ~- t7 rvt �; r MTNUTi:S OF THE FhANNING Cl)t•1MISSION 1•ii;I•:TING ItI:LD 140VJ:MI3I;I2 17, 1986 01089 GREENE CONTINUED Mr. Greene showed photos of the existing kitchen and master bedroom indicating the need for additional space and noted that the addition will not obstruct any views. No one was present from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Goetten, recommend approval subject to removal of 500 s.f. of non-structural hardcover (gravel parking area) resulting in a net decrease in hardcover. Mo` on, Ayes 5, Nays 0. i1095 CITY OF ORONO 2345 BLAINE AVENUE CONDITIONAL USE PEFJ-11re PUBLIC I1F. 1114G 10:47 - 10:40 The Affidavit of Publijation and Certificate of Mailing was noted. This is a request for a conditional use permit for the installation of an Emergency preparedness siren at the Municipal Water Plat site. No one was present From the public regarding this matter and the public }.oaring was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Taylor, to recomnend approval of the conditional use permit for the proposed weather siren, subject to the structure being located 50' from the nearest residential lot line per the proposed site plan. Motion, Aye.. 5, Nays 0. Olb^1/01092�;SAILORS tIORIZ INC. 71-750--ATM1960 SHORE.JNE DRIVE SKETCH PLAN REVIEi•I John Vogt was present for this matter. Also present was Char)ie Stone representing three different parties inter,sted in buying the property. These involvE the expan- _on of Sailors World marina to the west side of County Road 15 as follows: 11091, 1950 Shoreline Drive - Applicant plans to raze the existing residential structures and install a parking lot. 01092, 1960 Shoreline Drive - Applicant plans to terminate the transmission repair/gas sales use of property for sales and beat service operation of SailorL World. 11 MINU'IFS OF THL PLANNING COM141SSION F ,"E'TING 111.11D NOVE.Pil3Rl2 17, 1986 01091/01092. SAILONS WORLD INC. CONTINUED Fir. Stone stated that they are not planning to expand Sailors World, merely spread it out over a larger area, possibly ;separating the sales & service from the boat dock rental. Mary Crear, 1980 Spates Avenue( adjacent neighbor, was present for this matter. She stated that they are pleased with Sailors World as neighbors. She added, speaking on behalf of Mr. Tourangeau, 2060 Spates Ave., Mr. Tourangeau does not have any problem with the F,roposed parking lot but requests that there be a 6-8' grass area between his property and parking lot and also some type of natural buffer from his property. Firs. Crear stated she had concerns regarding the use of the parking lot, she was opposed to large boats being parked which would further obstruct their view of the lake. They are ameniable t derly winter storage of new average sized boats. is also concerned about the disposition of the exis_ ig gas tanks. ..caning Administrator Mabusth stated for the record, that t � City by encouraged Sailors World to ust_ the City lot ( . weekends for overflow parking. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that the Planning Commisnion should address the following issues: 1. Effects of rezoning prope.ties to B-2. 2. Distinguish between a legal land use for each property. a) 1950 Shoreline Drive %,.ou ld require a zoning amendment if property is not zoned to B-2 for parking lot use. b) 1960 Shoreline Dr., applicant - ust prove to City that a proposed change in use would be less intense than current use level. Goetten stated that: she would be willing to conceptually approve the continued non -conforming use rather than rezone. Chairman Kelley stated that he would be opposed to permanent storage of boats any tine of the year, he would like to keep an open area. He felt boat parking should be restricted to one only. He also felt that if the retail space was moved to the other side of County Rd. 15, an equal square footage of structure be eliminated on the other side 4n order to prevent the inlrnsification of .peration. Bellows stated that ahe felt a marina was a very appropriate use for lakeshore and in particular this piece of property. 12 MINUTES OF THE . iNNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD NOVEP4BET 17, 1986 01091/01092 SAILORS WORLD I14C. CONTINUED Goetten stated that she would like to see a survey of Sailors World as it presently exists with structures and uses designated. Chair, -,in Kelley stated that he felt the gas use should cease anc'a gas tanks removed. After discussion, Planning Commission unanimously agreed conc-ptually that this is a better use of the property than presently exists. Zoning Admiristrator Mabusth advised applicants that the next step would be submitting a formal comprehensive ' plan appl-cation following a zoning amendment request initiated by the City. APPROVAI .MUTES It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Bellows, to approve the Minutes of the October 20, 1986 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. Is!ANNING CO,"•U SSION REPRESENTATIVE. Chairman Kelley was appointed to attend the December 8, 1986 Council meeting. ADJOURNMENT 11:03 P.M. The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 11:03 P.M. 3-� MINUTrS OF 9'I1i; PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JANUARY 20, 19i17 ZONING AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING 9:23-9:34/10:34-10:52 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate cf Mailing was noted. Douglas Klint, was present representing the owner of Deering Island, Paul Scherber. Zoning Administrator N;abusth noted that notices were sent only to property owners within the KS District. She explained that there is an inventory of every property involved and that the changes consist mainly of a "housekeeping" nature (updating the facts on each property). Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that staff received a letter from Doug Klint indicating concern regarding any reclassification of Deering It land to that of a subs`andard non -conforming lot. She noted that the amendment as proposed would still classify Deering Island as a conforming record lot and that the change merely involves the area factual finding for tI.e . sland from 6.5 acres to 2.5 acres. Mabusth stated she would consult with the City Attorney on this matter and that maybe the record lot classification should also be changed. Pending resolution of Mr.Klint's issues stated in 1-is letter, Zoning Administrator Mabusth recommenced tabling the RS District portion of the zoning Amendment at this time. Mr. Robb, a Big Island property owner, was present stating he did not understand the amendment. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained the :hanr_e involving his property to Mr. Robb. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Bellows, table the PS District (Deering Isl -end ) portion of t ,- zoning amendment as recommended by staff, but to appro the liquor store use and public service structur- amendment as proposed by staff. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. Zoning Administrator Mabusth continued to review other pertinent sections of the proposed amendment which included perking lot use within a residential zone. Recommendaticns for the parking lot use included use of a 3' high sign to reduce obstruction instead of the allowed 8'. Bellows recommended that the parking lot be closed off to the public during the night. A natural buffer and/or privacy fencing was also recommended. 4 3 -D !MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COf*IISSION r,=TING BELD JANUARY 20, 1987 ZONING A14EIJDMENT CONTINUED Mabusth stated she would draft a formal amendment per Planning Commission's recommendations for action at their next meeting. 01012 WAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB 200 WAYZATA BOULEVARD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Wayzata Country Club Groundskeeper, Jim Lindblad, was present fcr this matter. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained this request for a conditional use permit to remove the accumulated sediments and bottom muck from a pond and ditches existing at the Wayzata Country Club. The ditches to be cleaned include approximately 300 yards in length between holes 10, 11, and 12, and about 450 yards in length between holes 15 and 18. The cleaning is intended to consist of scraping the existing banks and bed and resodding to the water line. It was noted that a 11 spoi 1 s from the pond will be removed and placed on Wayzata Country Club property in the City of Wayzata; and the ditch spoils will be _;sed as fill adjacent to the ditch area and seeded immediately to create low berms. Gaffron noted that at t_, original public hearing there were no comments from ;:he public and the reason for delay of the application was due to timing and funding for the project. Mr. Lindblad stated that the purpose of the proposal is to correct a 30 year problem of silt build-up. Curt Quady asked if thi! would affect Lake Minnetonka by creating a faster drainage. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that ~_he effects would be inconsequential because the work to Lv done is high in the Lake Minnetonka watershed and discharge from this area travels through a major wetland system prior to reaching the lake. He noted that City Engineer Cook recommends approval of the project subject to spoils being immediately seeded where they are left on the site. There were no other comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. 1� -+as moved by Bellows, seconded by Hanson, recommend ap oval per City Engineer's recommendations. Motion, Aeys 4, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE PI.ANNIUG COMMISSION MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 17, ] 9€37 #1080 CITY OF ORONO CONTINUED Mr. Burger asked abou the feasibility of two building lots on the south portion of the Burger property if sewered. Staff and Planning Commission explained to Mr. Burger the required 2-acres of contiguous dry -buildable area. Jim Maus, 3700 Bayside Road, asked how many lots could be developed on the Miner property if rezoned. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that based on dry land configuration, the southern part of the Miner property would remain at the current density. There were no other comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to recommend approval of the rezoning as proposed by s`_aff. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. 01102 ZONING AMENDMENT •- PS DISTRICT PARKING LOT IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT t. ALLOWED WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Staff submitted the parking lot amendment drafted per Planning Commission's direction at their last meeting. Chairman Kelley wished to amend it to react "A 10 feet wide buffer of natural screening, preferably evergreens, shall be planted ...". He also noted that he .could like the Police Department's input on this amendment. Bellows voiced concern for parking accomodations for the overnight sailor, which this amendment prohibits. Zoning Administrator M abusth noted th-it this amendment deals specifically with a parking lot use in residential districts. The code c•irrently has no special standards for parking areas in residential zones. After discussion, Planning Commission fel the ordinance should not be amended for parking lot use in a residential area. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Hanson, to recommend that the parking lot amendment be denied. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. M E M O R A_N D U M TO: Jean Mubusth, City of Orono FROM: Kathleen A. Blatz, (Ext. 4252) DATE:: April 13, 1987 RE: Parking Lots APR,? J ISSUE:: The City has requested a legal opinion as to whether or not the City Code allows parking lots to be built on residential zones without having the Code amended to include parking lots as a conditional or permitted use. ANALYSIS: The City of Orono Zoning Code does not recognize parking lots as a permitted or conditional use in a residential zone. The only circumstance for which a parking lot can be in existence is in relation to another primary use on the same lot. For example, schools and churches are allowed to and required to dedicate a certain portion of their property to parking space for vehicles. Section 10.61, subdivision 4 addresses the various performance standards for off-street. parking and loading requirements. The performance standards are included in order to alleviate or prevent congestion of the public right of ways and to promote the general welfare of the public: by establishing minimum requirements for off-street parking, loading and unloading motor vehicles. Section 10.61, subdivision 4H sets forth the requirement that all required off-street parking in the "A" districts "shall be on the same lot as the principal building." Although this requirement is set forth as a performance standard, it would not be appropriate for the City to grant a variance to the performance standard. By granting a variance to the standard (by allowing a parking lot on a separate lot instead of on the sane lot) the City would be in effect granting a use variance and not a variance to performance standards such as lot sire, hard cover, etc. Minnesota Statutes avid the City Code both prohibit the grantmy of use variances. Memo to Jean Mubusth April 13, 1987 Page 2 The only permissible way for the City to allow a parking lot in a residential zone is to amend the City Code to allow parking lots as a permitted or a conditional use. If this is the decision of the City Council, it should be noted that the conditional use section allows the City to attach any reasonable condition to the granting of a conditional use. Given the concern of the City relative to the allowance of Oarking lots in residential districts, it may be in the City's best interest to prescribe in the Code very definite and restrictive conditions surrounding the granting of parking lot conditional use permits. For example, the City could establish criteria which would state that the parking lot could not exceed a certain size, would need to be landscaped in a c;�rtain manner, and would have to meet set -back requirements over and above that required for other uses. The establishment of such conditions in the Code would serve the purpose of limiting the application for parking lot conditional use permits in the future. If you have any further questions about this matter, please feel free to give me a call. KAB/11/3250A cc: Mr. Mark Bernhardson "TOTING TO: mayor Grabek 1-1 AY 2019 Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson ' $W URONO FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator DATE: May 22, ljo7 SUBJECT: 1,1117 Willard C. .hull, 1.125 Spring Hill Road - Variance The applicant has submitted additional information for your consideration and has asked to address the Council at your May 26th meeting. Mr. Shull has listed specific nardships to his property in addition to providing additional facts on the construction of the track system. Staff has advised the applicant that the hardship must relate to damaye sustained by boat as a result of storage in the lake water. Mr. Shull has stated that he would respond to any questions Council may have on the issue of hardship. The applicant has referred to the 4 feet width standard - "no piece of the construction is close to 4 feet width". Staff was questioned by the applicant regarding the construction of lace access stairs on a neighbor's property. Staff advised that lakeshore properties with steep banks to shoreline are permitted stairs to assure safe access to lake but t.1at stairs can not exceed the allowed 4 feet width and safety stops can not exceed 4 feet by 4 feet. The magnitude of this specific access .stairs structure necessitated the variance review. (#11.27 R. Brown). It would appear that the proposed permanent concrete joists would result in approximately 16 - 17 square feet of permanent hardcov�r within tije 0 - 75 sethack area. Staff has sketched what .f� be 1 ievr to be the proposed joists insta11.1tion - ;E'P_ DAY'rON HUDSON CORPORATION 777 Nicollet Mall L Minneapolis, Mirnesota 5540237p �May 19�2,198P94sMs. Jeanne Mabusth Building & Zoning Administrator iv Orono City Hall P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Ms. Mabusth: I request that my application for variance be put on the Tuesday, May 26 agenda of the Urno Council. I wish to clarify the following issues regarding the boat track proposed for my Lakeshore: Boat - 19 feet long - No canopy will be installed Structure within 0-75 feet of shoreline 3 concrete reinforced joists - each 9" x 24" x 7' -t, anchor winch and support 2 tracks extending into water _otal height above ground - 2 feet including cart on track Not harucover since: 1) no piece of the construction is close to 4' wide 2) will not interfere with direcT absorption of rainfall into the ground Hardships unique to Shull location which prohibit alternative means of gaining navigational access and practical use of the lake, which are rights of property owner. a) mucky bottom too soft to support traditional boat life DEPTH out from shore ' out from shore inches of water 23 30 inches of silt 19 30 depth to sand 47" 011 b) removal of dock and boat track in winter requires winch anchored on firm land foundation to lift legs out of mud c) incoming Wulsfeld CreeK results in continuo)-: rlow of silt and algae causing water conditions such that storage of boat in water would be impractical, costly and damaging. d) permanent struct-,re offshore to withstand ice pressure would require dredging and major construction which would disrupt ecology of adjacent conservation area and wildlife. Sincerely, Willard C.�q'ull, III -0 %-t) G i�.Ii-,Y 2 v I 5 6 7 To: Mayor Grabek � 0 `� Orono Council Members URONO City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: May 22, 1987 Subject: #1119 W. Duncan MacMillan/Craigbank Associates, 1700 Fox Street - Variance and Conditional Use Permit - Resolution Attached 's a resolution for approval. of the MacMillan sports center and caretaker residence application. Please carefully review the finings and conditions contained therein, and make any appropriate revisions. City of oRONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO, A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION) 9 (C) s 9 (D) AND SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (A), AND GRANTING A CONDITIOUAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 3 (G) FILE 01119 WHEREAS, Craigbank Associates and W. Duncan MacMillan (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1700 Fox Street within the City of. Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant hEs made application to the City of Orono to permit the construction of certain structures as follows: A. Caretaker residence (detac .erg) of total floor area 2,810 s.f. located between the defined front lot line and the principal building on the property, requiring a variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) which allows a maximum floor area of 1,000 s.f. for accessory structures; and a variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) which requires that no accessory structure be located nearer the front lot line than the principal building on the property; and a conditional use permit for a guest house use as required in Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (G). B. Sports center recreational. access(;. building (detached) of total floor area 16,375 s.f. located between the defined front lot line and the principal building on the property, and such structure having a defined building height of 33 feet and a peak height of 40 feet, requiring a variance to Section 10.,)3, Su'-)divi.sion 9 (C) which allows a maximu-. floor area of. 1,000 s.f, for accessory structures; and a variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) Which requires that no accessory structure be located neater the front lot line than the principal building on the property; any' a variance to Section 10.28, Subdivision S (A) which requires that no structure or building shall exceed 2� stories or 30 feet in height. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as 7.onino File t1119. 2. The property is located in the PR-114 Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. Page 1 of 7 City of OR(1)NO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3. The property contains approximately 13.5 dry buildable acres in area. 4. Tne Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public heari;.g on March 16 and April 10, 1987 at which time comments were heard from all. interested parties. 5. The Orono City Council reviewed this application on May 11, 1987 and voted 4-1 to grant approval of the proposed variances and conditional use permit, and directed staff to draft a resolution of approval. 6. The hardships and areas of practical difficulty for justification of the reque.-t.ed variance: as outlined by the applicant in his memo submitted to the City on May 5, 1987, are as follows: A) As evidenced by the soil samples taken on the property the water table is very high. Several samples indicate that the water level is only 4 to 5 feet below the land surface. The overall height of the tennis facility could be reduce3 by placing it deeper into the ground but for the level of the water table. Additionally, the composition of the soil also dictates the location of the facility. To move the building from the present designed location would require Extensive soil correction. Both soil composition and water table level are out of control of the applicants. 3) The main residential structure 13 French provincial in design. To move the tennis facility closer to or attach it to the main residence would severely affect the aesthetics of the residence and thus destroy the architectural integrity of the building. Great care has been taken to design and landscape the tennis structure in such a way as to make it as unobtrusive as possible. To relocate the structure may cause it to be more visible from Fox Street then it will be in its proposed location. C) Under the City Ordinances the construction of a tennis court is a permitted within Zone RR-lB an(; is considered an "accessory stri ure". The size of a tennis court is approximately 61) xi20', for a total of 7,200 square feet. It is impossible to enclose a tennis court (a permitted use) and have It less than 10-12,000 square feet after taking into consideration perimeter area needed around the court, changing areas and storage. Additionally, the City ordinances would allow the construction of an animal barn or green'-,ouse as large or larger than thr, proposed tennis court without the need for a variancer. since , tennis court and a harp are permitted uses within 7.one RR-111, !,;Ah should `xv treated imilarly. {'nne. � of 7 City of OC)NO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. D) The Orono ordinance governing set back of accessory structures from the "front yard" is geared to the normal. positioning of a house to the street, i.e. the house normally faces the street and is located a very short distance from the street. The ordinance is intended to helm preserve the character of the neighborhood as to not allow accessory structures such as garages, sheds, etc. in the "front yard" which can have a detrimental visual impact to the neighborhood. Here, the property is approximately 13.5 acres with the residence overlooking a small pond. The residence has its back to Lox S`.reet (a full 400 feet from the street), and ir sly visible from Fox Street. Clearly, this situation does riot fall within the original and normal intent of the ordinance and definition of "front yard". The caretaker house and the tennis structure would be set back 125 and 150 feet, respectively, from Fox Street. There would be no detrimental visual impact on the neighborhood by allowing a variance from the "front yard" ordinance. I.and- scaping which would shield the structure from Fox Street has been incorporated into the design. E) Because of the size of the property and the landscaping design, the essential character of the neighborhood w` 11 not be altered by allowing Lhe variances. 7. Th:� proposed caretaker residence meets all performance standiards of Section 1G.20, Subdivision " (G). S. The Ci4 f Council has con ;idered this applciation including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments b; the applicant and the effect of the propcsed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 9. The City Council finds that the condition- existing on this pro- perty are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would rot merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demon- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoninq Code and Comprehensive PlAn of the City. 10. -lie City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the guest house use for a caretaker residence will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affer-t light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objuc-tives of the Zoninq Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 3 of 7 City of ()RONO RESOLUTION Or THE CITY COUNCIL NO. CONCLUSIOU , ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon cne ur more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants the following -.7ariances: A. A varianca to Section 10.03, Sub si.on 9 (C) to a ow construction of a detached sports center- recreational acces -)ry building of 16,375 s.f. in total floor area and a detached cared cer residence of 2,810 s.f. in total area, which accessory structures are normally required to nut exceed 1,000 s.f. in area; D. A variance to Section 10.02, Subdivision 9 (D) to allow the sport center structure and caretaker residence structure to be located as proposed between the defined front lot line and the principal building on the property, such accessory structures not normally allowed to be located nearer the front lot line than the principal building on the property; C. A variance to Scction 10.28, Subriivi.sion 5 (A) to allow the sport center_ structure to attain a defined height of 33' and maximum peak height of 40' where the defined maximum height allowed is normally 30'; and hereby grants a conditional use permit per Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (G) to permit the guest house use of the proposed caretaker residence structure, subject to the follyain:g conditions 1. This approval is for construction of the structures and driveway as shown on attached exhibits as follows: Exhibit B-1: Site Plan Exhibit B-2: Sports Center Exhibit 9-3: Caretaker Residence Exhibit B-4: Screening Any changes in plans which result in a relocation of structures or driveway, or which result in an increase to the floor area or height of either proposed structure, or which result in a reduction in the degree of screening proposed, shall be required to be approved by the City Council. 2. This resolution shall not become effective and shall not be filk-,- in the chain of title ol the property until the City Attorney has reviewed and approved e. covenant to he agreed to by the property owner. The purpose of s ch covenant is to assure to the City the following: Pagr 4 of 7 City of 0RONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A) The sports center structure shall never be used for commercial purposes but shall be used only by the property ownp-s for their private use, and for the use of their families, and non-paying guests. B) The sports center structure shall be adequately screened from the public roadway and from the neighboring residences so as not to appear as a commercial -type structure. C) Access to the sports center structure. shall never be directly via the public roadway but shall access from the private driveway. D) The sports center shall never be sold separately from the main residential structure on the property. E) If the property is subdivided, the principal residential structure and the sports center facility shall remain on a parcel. of property that maintains at least acres in area and maintains at least a 150' setback between the sports center and all newly created property lines, and maintains appropriate screening of the sports center. 3. The caretaker residence shall be for the sole u�•e of the owners or occupants of the principal residence: and their domestic employees or non-paying guests. The caretaker residence shall not become a separately rented dwelling unit. 4. During construction of the private driveway, caretaker residence and sports center, all construction traffic that exceeds 9 tons per axle shall access Fox Street via South Drown Road and not from Sc :h Orono Orchard Road. This we.Lght limit shall remain in effect until such time that a Certificate of occupancy is issued for the sports center structure, except du.,.ing_ periods of even more stringent seasonal road restrictions. 5. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or the special cod it ions of this resolution will expire on that date (MGy 26, 1988). 6. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and condi- tions of this resolution shall nnstitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically termin,.te any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 7. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of thin resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 5 of 7 V City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NC. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 26th day of May, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hall.in, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property owner(s) Property Owners(s) ___ EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. DESCRIPTION: Part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (NE 1/4, SSE 1/4) of Section Three (3), Township One Hundred Seventeen (117), North of Range Twenty-three (23) West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, according to the U.S. Government Survey as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (NE 1/4, SE 1/4), thence East along the South line of said northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (NE 1/4, SE 1/4), Nine Hundred One (901) feet more or less to a point Four t;undred Twenty-nine and five tenths (429.5) feet West of the Southeast Corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (NE 1/4, SE 1/4), thence deflecting to the left at an an -,Id of 124' 58' from the last described course One Hundred Two ,ir2) feet; thence deflecting to the right at an angle of 110 fzom the last described course Fifty (50) feet; thence deflecting to the right at an angle of 1511 30' from the last described course .,=`ty (50) feet; thence deflecting to the right at an angle of 111 from the last described course One Hundred (100) feet; thence de.lecting to the right at an angle of 31 50' from the last described course One Hundred (100) feet; thence deflecting to the right at an angle of 40 58' from the last described course One Hundred (100) feet; thence deflecting to the right at an angle of )° 4 ' from the last described course Ninety-two (92) feet; thence deflecting to the left at an angle of 130 31' from the last described course One Hundred Eighty and Five tenths (180.5) fret to a point in the lake on said property; thence Westerly on e. line parallel with said South line of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (NE 1/4, SE 1/4), Eight hundred Seventy-two and Seventy-five Hundredths (872.75) feet more or less to the West line thereof, t*-rrnce South along the West line thereof Seven Hundred Forty-f.cur and Eighty-five Hundredths (744.65) feet to the point of beginning. w5 / r L� C�ite�lau EXHIBIT B-1 RESOLUTION NO. C1K.lOw4YW1lI W.!. YMD •! M d! ML'f. �! w.en t'M.•r0. •ywu•p•W�f/l�Y�. 01y�/ �fM�HiMA•/�10. aut �'Ja��ar� YY a�olso w � bitt -wm yr • -� vi EXHIBIT B-2 RESOLUTION NO. W �•• n+m K•t fM Wf.w C+.•R MV6e fftl 1l Ao1M.0.•r O YCtirftf1<wf• wwfb~ fr. (M fu. {f.f1 M p.f. MO fp crcuav _ ffq•fR •J t 2 , "o � h U Y Ens M 4 N C ate•= � r..-� � .a.�w ew.n nv �.w .a♦a w.veua.s.oa.r wwa. ..re w � a a+on a. oath vawawor w ar � ♦a. eo �TM.►!�. w 11a.� r am aw.0 C avr aarwo : tl_.q EXHIBIT B-3 RESOLUTION NO. ZV I Fca ht — o' •T<WT-A,Anw ♦ O' _: fa w w a wt. u. awt; YM.wMOn NO.h•1 � W • P• NN.trO UWfC••t �• MCf..M H��JO TM .tY� C 0•HG��/ CMS nC I� . e.� w crow w .•ortc+.o �i Ittcp 1 9- - kit V-W-a EXHIBIT B-4 RESOLUTION NO. ri3i.� C'r MAY? u 158 7 To: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members f City Administrator Bernhardson � From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Plann4ng & Zoning Administrator Date: May 18, 1987 Subject: #1135 Robert. Funning, Jr., 4220 Sixth Avenue North - Conditional. Use Permit - Resolution Attached is a proposed resolution for approval of the conditional use permit for a noise -barrier berm to be constructed at 4220 Sixth Avenue North. This item received a 3-2 vote for conceptual approval at an 11' average height above road crown at your meeting of 5/11/87. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILE #1135 WHEREAS, Robert iianninq, Jr. (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 4220 Sixth Avenue North within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City•") and legally described as follows: Lot 1, Winters Plentywood, Hennepin County, tdi.nnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a Conditional Use Permit to permit placement of fill to create a berm for noise-barriei purposes to reduce the traffic noise to his residence from County Road 6 per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1135. 2. The property is located in the RR-lA Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. On April 20, 1987, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application and voted 3-3 to recommend approval of the proposed berm subject to no fill. within 2n' of the wetland, a maximum berm height of 6' above the crown of County Road 6, and slopes no steeper than 2:1. 4. The City Coun,7.L1 reviewer] this application on May 11, 1987 and voted 3-2 to approve the proposed berm with a height averaging 11' above the crown of County Road 6 and side slopes no steeper `han 2:1, finding that the Municipal Code gives the Cz)unci.l autr _ty to regulate the placement of fill via th,_ conditional use permit requirement, and finding that the 11' height of fill is necessary to preserve the applicant's enjoyment of his property. 5. The City Council has consi0eied this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staf f and comments of the appl icant and the effect cf the proposed use on the health, safety and welfate of the community. Pacie ] of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO 6. The City Council finds that granting a Conditional Use Permit to allow fill to be placed to a height 11' above the crown of County Road 6 will not be detrimental to the health, safety c, general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives ,use the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 to permit placement of fill, subject to the following conditions: 1. Under the terms of this conditional use permit and per City Code, work must begin on the project within one year of the date of this approval, or this conditional use permit will expire. 2. Applicant shall provide a letter of credit as part of a developer's agreement to be executed by applicant and the City prior to issu^.nce of the grading and fill permit. 3. Applicant shall slabmit a revised final grading plan by applicant's surveyor or an engineei -icr to issuance of the grading permit. 4. Applicant or applican, -contractor shall obtain a grading and fill permit prior to cormencE, of work on the site. S. No filling or gr._ading is a1, 'ed within 26' of the designated wetland. 6. The average brrm height shall be Rio greater than 11' above the crown of County R(ad 6. 7. Finish slopes of the berm shall be 2:1 or flatter. N. Erosion protection measures to prevent erosion of berm and to keep sediments out of the wetland will be required during construction and until vegetation is established. 9. Because of the approx,mately 14,000 cubic yards of _fill required, it is anticipated that his project may take an unusually long time to complete. Final grading, Needing, and mulching shall occur no later than June 1, 198q. Any portion of the project that reaches completion prior to that date shal I he finish graded, seeded, and mulched immediately upon reachi nct final grade. Applicant. shall be rPsponsit' for cal l inq for inspvcO-ions 1,y City staff upon completion of each. portion of the project. Pa(;e 2 of 4 City of OR ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO, 10. Applicant is advised to contact the MCWD and obtain any permit that may be required by that agency prior to commencement of the project. 11. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and condi- tions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 12. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chan of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City-t-uncil on this 26th day of May, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City C. �U Property Uwt�er ( s Jame, R. Grabek, Mayor To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson 2 G,1587 a:; r JF URUHO Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator May 19, 1987 #1138 Ronald E. Demshar, 2821 Casco Point Road - Variance - Resolution List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Resolution Exhibit B - Planning Commission Action Notice c` 5/5/87 Ex'nibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 4/29/87 Exhibit D - Planning Commission Minutes of 5/4/87 Discussion - w. Please review the memo and exhibits of 4/29/87. Applicant wishes to construct a second story, construct an attached garage addition, and add a deck on the lake side of the house. Planning Commission, at their 5/4/87 meeting, recommended approval for the setback variances to allow construction of the additions as proposed, subject to removal of the existing detached garage (and reversion to grass area) no later than May 1, 1988. This results in a 75-250' hardcover increase from 52.9% to 54.4%. Sti.'f Recommendation - Staff recommends approval per the recommendation of the Planning Commission. A resoluti•in reflecting their recommendation is attached for Council's review. NOTE: If Council does not find that the hardship presen`ed justifies the hardcover increase requested, staff notes it is feasible to reduce the deck and driveway by at least the 143 s.f. necessary to result in no hardcover increase. City of OR,ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) AND 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 AND 2 FILE 01138 WHEREAS, Ronald E. Demshar (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 2821 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Loc. 118, Spring Park, and that part of Lake Shore Avenue, now vacate-1, lying between extension across it of the side lines of said lot and including the land between said vacated avenue and the shore of Lake Minnetonka, lying between extensions across said strip of land of the side lines of said Lot 118, according to the recorded plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds, in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section. 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) and Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and 2 to permit the construction of a 12'x24' ground level deck, a 28'x47' second story over the existing house, and a 12'x31' attached garage addition; the second story addition requiring 5.6' and 3.4' right and side setbacks respectively where 10' side setbacks are normally required, and requiring an average lakeshore setnack encroachment variance of 18' where no average lakeshore setback encroachment is normally allowed; the attached garage -ddition requiring a 9.2' right side setback where 10' side setback is normally required; and the additions in total requiring a variance for excessive hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Cron , Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File i1138. 2. The property is located in the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commis-'- reviewed this application on May 4, 1987, and recommended approval f the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A) The second story addition over the existing house will have no detrimental effec,_ on any neighboring views of the lake. Page 1 of 5 _It y of OHONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. B) The ground level deck proposed on the lake side of the house will have no railing and will have no effect on neighboring views of the lake. C) Applicant requests to keep the existing detached garage for storage because the existing house has only a 300 s.f. basement hence existing storage is limited. D) Planning Commission finds that it is appropriate to allow applicant to keep the existing garage during construction of the additions, but that there are no hardships demonstrated to justify retention of that detached garage once the new attached garage is completed. E) Upon removal of the detached garage, applicant's 75-250' hardcover will revert to a total. of 54.4€, or a 1.5€ increase over the pre-existing 52.9%. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on t'iis property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would rot adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to '-.he applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demon- strable• hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial proper-y right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER MM CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to the Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) and Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and 2 to permit the construction of a 12'x24' ground level deck, a 28'x4i' second story over the existing house, and a 12'x31' attached garage addition; the second story addition requiring 5.6' and 3.4' right and side setbacks respectively where 10' side setbacks are normally required, and requiring an avE�rage Lakeshore setback encroachment variance of 18' where no average lakeshere setback encroachment is normally allowed; the attached garage addition requiring a 9.2' right side setback where 1.0' side setback is normally required; and the additions in total requiring a variance for excessive hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone �.herr• only 21,* hardcover is normally allowed, Subject to the following conditions: I a g (,'' of 5 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1. Hardcover on the property shall be allowed as follows: Stairs 72 s.f. Platform 32 s.f. Shed 48 s.f. 152 s.f. or 3.4% (No changes from existing) 75-250' Zone Existing House 1.,860 s.f. �►� Attached Garage/Addition _ .I..f. Sidewalks Q - 2 s J . Block Retaining Wall !8 s.f. Driveway 2,095 s.f. Deck on West Side of House 288 s.f. 5,095 s.f. or 54.4% Applicant is advised that no future additional hardcover will be approved on the property and that any future proposals for additional hardcover will not be approved, but might be approved only with concurrent removals of existing hardcover. 2. Applicant is advised that the existing shed and platform at the lakeshore are considered non -conforming structures and are subject to the pertinent ordinances governing Ouch structures. 3. The existing (?etached garage shall be removed no later than May 1, 1988 and that area shall revert to grass non -hardcover immediately upon removal of the garage. 4. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and most be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council. approval, or this variance will expire on that date (May 26, 1988). 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoninq code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and sha.l l ho punishable a!-. a misdemeanor. Page 3 of 5 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 6. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 26th day of May, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hal.lin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) ZONING FILE NO. 1138 C:.TY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 5/5/87 ----------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Ron Demshar COPIES TO: 2821 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 ----------------------------------------------------------------- TYPE OF APPLICATION: XX Variance ----------------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 5/4/87 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: XX Approval: subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Recommended approval of setback variances to allow construction of 2nd story over existing house, 1st story garage addition, and proposed deck, subject to: 1. Removal of existing detached garage no later than May 1, 1988 - this area must revert to non -hardcover (grass). 2. Hardcover variance granted to allow 75-250' hardcover increase from 52.9% to 54.4%. 3. No further hardcover variances allowed. Please contact Mike Gaff.ron (473-7357) to discuss proposed upgrade of lakeshore bank. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: Council May 26, 1987 If you desire certified copies of the official. Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator. Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: April 29, 1987 Subject: #1138 Ronald E. Demshar, 2821. Casco Point Road - Variance - Public Hearing Application - 1) Add second story over main body of house (28'x471), substandard setbacks on both sides; 2) Create an attached garage requiring 121x3l' addition to house, revise driveway; 3) Add 12'x24' deck and connecting sidewalk at ground level on lake side of house. Zoning District - LR-lC, �-acre sewered Variances Required - Setbacks: Existing 1) Right side, 2nd Story* 5.6' 2) Left Side, 2nd Story** 3.4' 3) Right Side, Addition 9.8' 4) Average Lakeshore Setback Encroachment 18' Hardcover: 0-75' 75-250' Proposed 5.6' 3.4' 9.2' on 3.4% 3.4% 52.9% 61.7% * Chimney within 4.1' of side lot line. ** Chimney within 1.9' of side lot line. List of Exhibits Allowed or Required Variai.ce 10' 4.4' or 44% 10' 6.6' or 66% 10' 0.8' or 8% 0' 18' 0% 3.4% (no change) 25% 36.7% Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat. Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List/Acknowledgements Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Survey With Staff Sketches and Notations Exhibit F - House Plans Discussion Appl: cart is proposing to add a second story to his residence which currently has substandar.ds setbacks on both ,ides. Additionally, he wishes to add to and remodel the portion of the house away from the lake to create an attached garage, resulting in a sma 1 I increase in driveway hardcover. It appears that the existing detached garage is intended to remain. Also, a ground -level I.2'x24' deck is proposed to be constructed on the lake side, with a portion of sidewalk to connect to the existing sidewalk along the side of the house. Zoning File #1138 April 29, 1987 Page 2 of 3 Issue I - Side Setbacks. Three side setback variances are required - the second story will be contructed over the portion of the house that is 3.43' from the east lot line, 5.6' from the west lot line. The effect of this second story on the "light and open space" in the neighborhood would seem t,; be minimal. We have not had comments from either_ neighbor as of this 4:ri_ting. Also, the 12' house extention to create room for the attached garage will be 9.2' from the side lot line. Staff has no conceptual pf-)blem with these variances. Issue II - Average Lakeshore Setback. Although there will be no extention of the house further lakeward than what exists now, the house already is encroaching into the average setback. The proposed addition will have no impact on views enjoyed by the neighbor to the east. There is a slight potential that the neighbor to the west might lose some views from his second story deck looking over the applicant's house. These have not been confirmed and staff does n: t see them as a concern unless the neighbor expresses such a concern. The proposed ground level deck is not intended to have a railing, and will have no effect on views. Issue III - Hardcover. Staff sees hardcover as a major issue on this lot. Planning Commission and Council rarely have approved 75-250' hardcover in the range of 50% except in obvious hardship situations, and even more rarely allowed an increase from 50% to 60%. Looking at a typical apr ication similar to this one, refer back to Gordon Nelson at 1310 Elmwood A . enue. The lot size was 0.28 acres, with only minimal hardcover in the 0-75' zone; garage additions were allowed to increase 75-250' hardcover from 33% to 34.5%. In the Schall application, 605 Park Lane, with a lot area of only 0.20 acres, an increase in the 0-75' zone from 49% to 52% was allowed, again where there was almost no 0-75' hardcover. In fact, a review of similar cases where the existing house and improvements are almost totally in the 75-250' zone, indicates that the typical hardcover percentages allowed are in the range of 25% to 40%, hence this proposed increase from 53% to 62% is not consistent with contemporary approvals. Staff agrees ghat the property needs a driveway backup apron in order to not have to hack on to Casco Point Road. However, applicant should be asked to discuss what hardships to the property or unusual circumstances justify the high hardcover percentages. It is necesary to keep the detached garage if an attarhed garage it built'? Is the extent of driveway proposed really necoss<ary? Does the lack have tc, he as large as proposed? Zoninc File #1138 April 29, 19e7 Page 3 of 3 Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval of the second story addition with its related side setback variances and average setback variances. Staff recommends that applicant must justify the need for the amenities that increase the hardcover percentage and staff suggests that no hardcover incr_eas•2 may he appropriate given the history of Council action or sim, J ar situations. NOTE: On May 1, 1987, applicant b,:ought in photos of his lakeshor.e bank. No accompanying proposal or reason for these photos being submitted. Application form does not address this work. If changes to or repair to lakeshore banks is proposed, It will likely require a separate conditional use permit application. This issue was not addressed in staff's review of the appi'cation. V ono►J ' / , -7: ` , -� .7 . 3) t2CW.0Vf ua U-1 tcUC u 1 . �?.'1- e 7 Fee O Receipt Initials �yL i CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional var ) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application; After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Y')-(i;- Please check one - Is the property abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (home) c j Z - C( 7/ -lj'7e,,-' Name ���-jig l� 1;,,_ �` � Phone (work) 07-41 Z1-o82L_ Address: ( / ,.= "f ►.", City: �[�':rc� Zip: - / --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address: City: Zip: Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PR^"PRTY Present Zonl trict 4- � - i" Present Use 4), erty Residential Other (specify) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DUSCRIPTION OF RZQOZST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request i. detail: e-x1lr �. -.' �'._� «��� ,«1-f�.•..�.r-1 s.t b� VARIAMCM RZQOIRZD Lot Area Tot Width Setback Varia•ices ( Front Hardcover Side Rear) Other ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- HARDSHIP -') Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS .� Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with zoning Code Requirements: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. 'Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center - 348-32'71) . 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the - names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must. L,ign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information hes not been included. ------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Sigr- -ire____ _ _— Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information requ red or requested by t'.le Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the hest of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signat'jrp Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to t.hi , application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by C-ty staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga- tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signatures ;gate Applicant must have all submittals into the City offic•edays before the Planning Commission Meet incr. F'lanni.nq Com.-ris!7jon Meeting:. are, held on the third Monday of each month. Applicant: must Le F,rc r ent at all scheduled rerview meetings of the F'iannincl ('c!mrnis.!ic!n an,i Council, and, if an dflp.i scant is ur,ahIc :o att*,ud i 5,,r-h cht f.-d '!icc•tinq, t0 [)l;,e make arrange - ment s to have :in aut hor i 7e�O r"i�7<. [1t Ot t (Illd ill YO?ir pl.'ce and to t.idv is e It Suilding & Zoning office cif tni, eh.incie Frior to tho me finq. v r (31) 20 Atr� 1 ``J h 12 22 e ' •ofticFt t• Ly' I�1` �o fool 4a y'� 1 JPA 94 `x r n . VLt- DATE 33/33/87 PATCH OOS 38 20-117-23 31 0014 O"4ER NVE STATE LM4D DEPT TAXPAYEV CITY OF OPMO NAY-E/ADOR CONVEYED 9/8/80 ST DEED 7 38 2Q-117-23 32 OOOS PPO! A4.9 02818 CASCO ROINT RD OLairf NAe! R03ERT M EY.FIELD 3 WIFE TA.XT+A,'R DALE R RA1',CN mom/AOOR 2818 CASCO POI'r 90 WAYZATA MN 38 20-111-23 32 OGr PRO/ A01OR OZEZi CASCO POI11i RD Mlty Milt DAVID J YOPKS A WIFE TAXPAYER ^AVID J YORKS N:M/ACOA 2aZS CA=!% .`R ROAD WAYZATA MN }y191 38 20-117-L '2 N11 PP P AD.. OZ91S CA'-' ITHT i" O.2:iR 11, 0 A C SCANUON TAX PA 1 u GENE i CATMR ME St-01.0N NAME/tDON :815 CASCO POINT WOAD ORO/O MN Mop AWN TALAPATER TOTAL BATCH 005 ONIi NA71E/A0011 ITEM EF COL%rrY ''"" -Tv IM07MAU01 SYSTEM Fiwv '-PS LIST 38 31 0057 0283-1; POINT RD %7GAP.ET E r)PAV..E .LFRED A IARY IVEBSEN _835 CASE 'T RD WAYZATA M. v391 38 23-117-23 32 0OP6 0_C24 CASCO POINT RD 11IRIAM I JUiitr>O!1 NIRIC!" � JOHNSON 2824 Li— ,l POINT RD ZATA M 55391 38 , 117-23 32 0009 02821 CA:CO PUIN" RD R Z OEM-AAR & M M DEESHAR RMALD & MAP.CARET OENSH'3 Z821 CASCO POINT RD 010.10 MN 55391 33 20-117-23 32 0012 OZ813 CASCO rOINT RD L & M BACHKES LEO` .' PD & MAP A?:N BACHKES 2813 CASCO POINT R0 WAYZATA Y4 55391 REPO=rr NO. PI435401 SAS' 9 38 20-117-23 32 0054 02818 CPSCO POINT RD 70C ERT M ENFIELD 9 WIFE DALE R RAASCH 2818 CASCO FOINT RD WAYZATA NiN 55391 38 20-117-23 32 O '7 0_-:29 CASCO POIN" AD B E PETERSCN & '1 P PETERSON ERYCE E PETERSON A-0 MARY PAT PETERSUN 2829 CASCO POINT RO,%D Crct:3 t"N 55391 ,3 20-117-23 32 0010 02817 CA!'CO POINT RD M B STP,ON ETAL N S MICKLEY & C M BRICKLEY z817 CA5CO PT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 26-117-23 32 0016 02800 CASCO POINT RD P FOX - F H�:RFURTH REAL EST THOMAS 6 KING 2300 CASCO POINT PC, WAYZATA MN 55391 PUN OATE 03/30/87 HV;WPIN COUNTY PROPE^TY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PR[.�FRTY OVNERS LIST PAGE 10 fl!:7CH 005 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCLMATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE 0`l THE RECOiWr) OF THE HEt":SPIN COU!4TY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO ,7HE BEST OF MY KNOWLEOGE AftO BELIEF. / OAT,_ /,x Y !� A IL Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form print names) Tprint address }gave reviewed the plans for the proposed improv--lent or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No.Gi. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but mert--ly• to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. r / / Property owner Property owner Date Date If you have, any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning office at least 1.0 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. ,7 Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form 1 l _ [print names)] [print addressT 1- have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the located at --'- "", C �. << c ,l f�~`` property r� [�._I also referred to as Land Use Application No. 1I3� . I (we) understand that in executing this ac'7 iowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and th"— "-- the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner c � Date ^T Property Owner Date If you have az.y information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. CERTIFICATE OF SU]R,VE Prepared for: Ronald E. Demshar 1) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 118, Spring Park, and that part of Lake Shore Avenue, now vacated, lying between extension across it of the side lines of said lot and including the land between said vacated avenue and the shore of Lake Minnetonka, lying between extensions across said strip of land of the side lines of said Lot 118, u,.;cording to the recorded plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds, in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. o �/ /C, 'O / s.( 4I5 one /I. i g?0 ^ _Oa t� a\fir i is p,�\ �N GENERAL NOT XSU 0 Denntt!s iron mcm,11—rit rlroposod top Of foundation elev. c r-o. fl, I , 1, 1 , ;, L', IrW floor elev. r931.3 !;pot ciarage floor cluv. qA (I :;I)()t Df nu t 1. %1 1 i. I (JO ,Tlt(,Ut lines d0f'Otc proposed features; (:()jjt_oLjr ljjjf�!j denot(- existing fe,ALU1'(_i EAL I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was SC30, AL-L METRO L.A..N_P propared by me, or under my direct supervision and that Q T I tm a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of BOOK RAGE URVEY0RS_ the Stainnesot::. e340 Daniels Street FILL NO. I ake, Minnr!�,nt- r�r _ CERT'IFICATE OF_URiT Prepared for: 01, DN-' gpjPTT9Ni <� f Lot 118, Spring park, and that part of Lake Shore Avenue, now vacated, lying between ~ :� extension across it of the side lines of said; 4, ' lot and including the land between said vacated s.�� �� T avenue and the shore of take Minnetonka, lying q between extensions acrose► void strip of land 'w ;'K.r� of the side lines of said Lot 118 accordingto � the recorded plat thereof on file or of record r �''+.,� ,A in the office of the Register of Deeds, in and 4tr�9 for Hennepin County, Minnesota.; NX � I If 117 STA FF No i-eS �ff`i7tPtnnZy �s' �raRh i zie its 0 •v. 4A444mc Ai%ttNn-f 0 '44100 , ORONO HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKS#T LAKESHOPE A. Existing B. Existino SETBACK lot area hard�)ver ^NE in zone in zone sf sf �5-2 sf 576/ sf 250-3�jo l Gf of 500-1000' sf of C. Existing hardcover percentage [ (B.A) x 1001 0 X. V. D. Proposed hardcover in zone sf E. Proposed hardcover percentage [(D;A) x 100] L 501. —6 7G s f t= F. Allowed hardcover percentage 0 ^/p 2 5 sf 0 3% sf Directions: SEM SrAlCiC CUC144400NS o/ 3 5 0 A. Existing ►.ot Area in one - includes the total square footage of dry buildable land within the specified ne. B. Existing Hardcover in one - _ncludes the square footage of existing roofs, decks, sidewalks, driveways (oravel or paved) and oth`r rain -impervious surfaces within the specified zone. C. Existing Hardcover Percentage - divide the number in B by the number in A and multiply by 100. D. Proposed Hardcover in Zone -- includes the existing hardc •rer plus all proposed additional hardcover. E. Proposed Hardcover Percentages - divide the number in D by the number in A and multiply by 100. F. Allowed Hardcover Percentages - if the percentages in column E for any setback zone exceed the allowed percentages in column F, you should contact the Zoning Department at 473-7357 to discuss the possibilities of obtaining a variance. Generally, if a concurrent removal of existing hardcover matches the additional hardcover proposed, resulting in no net increase of hardcover in a specified zone, a variance may not be necessary. HARDCOVER REVTy-q 2821 Casco Point Road - Znni.ng File #1138 Total Lot Area = 13,860 s.f. = 0.32 acres 0-75' - Lot Area = 4,500 s.f. Existing 0-75' Hardcover Stair 31x24' Platform 4'x8'+/- Shed 6'x8'+/- 75-250' - 1 tea = 9,360 s.f. * Existing 75-250' Hardcover 72 s.f. 32 s.f. 48 s.f. 152 s.f. or 3.4% House (27.7x47)+(18x31) 1,860 s.f. Detached Garage (21.6x31.5) 680 s.f. Concrete Walks ( .°x79)+(5xll) 258 s.f. Block Wall (lx28) 28 s.f. Gravel Driveway (48x24)+(22x11h) +(llx26,'(45xll) 2,054 s.f. * Rock/Plastic Near House (3x24) 72 s.f. 4,952 s.f. or 52.9% Approximately 300 s.f. of rock and plastic has been removed from the lake side of the house, and is intended to be replaced with a 12'-24' deck and connecting sidewalk. Proposed 75-25n' Hardcover House Addition (12x31) Sidewalk (5xll)+(70x2.9) +(4x29) Detached Garage Block Wall Driveway (22x60)+(20xl4) +(45xll) 2,095 s.f. Deck 12x2.. 288 s.f. Sidewalk 3x26 78 s.f. 5,775 s.f or 61.7% 1,860 s.f. 3% s.f. 374 s.f. 680 s.:. 28 s.f. kA, EA." 14-t" PyCitl' LNINM LEVIL V�i:L 6V t'" _NY 04 Ely OM41c. iJ ZN MAW TIC. nt� w �-i �' . i �- � �\ (�I� j�� I i �' E L�; G .i_ _. _ .� .. _ .. _. _ _..- - - --_ _ _ - --- - - - - -. _. _ .___- _ ._ i_ _ __� MZT5, 16*- b, x it: a/i� i ; S _" r r - _ - - � it •Tt !,� �_ CERTIFICATE OF SURVEI Prepared for: Ronald E. Demshar -- /o try r^R LEGAL 'DESCRIPTION: Lot 118, Spring Park, and that part c` Lake Shore Avenue, now vacated, lying between extension across it of the side lines of Said lot and including the land between :aid vacated avenue and the shore of Lake Minneto.ika, lying between extensions across said strip of land of the side lines of said Lot 118, a.;cording to the recorded plat thereof on file o; of record in the office of the Register of Deeds, in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. S �,LvrV w c rN �} ppL 1 CA N TS p t oPOU:b NbDIVONS 0 5 %,4ALVfV W I IV .•ppLI fA #J Ts eg*0036b hDDirroNS GENGh_AL Nc;)I'Lti: o Denotes iron monament Proposed top of foundation elegy. Denotes cross chiseled Ln concrete Proposed basement floor elev. _ riStiny f �• u, Pr;�I;�;.;s•c3 <I.�r. �I,`• f l,,r,r .. Ir,�E,oscd sE :. I fii:wc'll?1i' :�,rf.�ce drainages proposed features ate existing features ETKULAND 1 hereby certify that. this survey, plan or report was �i prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that �+�T?V �', v�`� c' .i,;`. kr• I i �r rs+r1 rind Srit veyr,r under the lbws t MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 11122 BIG ISLAND VETERAN'S CAMP CONTINUED It was moved by Taylor, seconded by Cohen, to table this review pending the Big Island tour. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. 11128 RAINEY ANDERSON 7r0 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD PR,:LIMINARY SUBDIVISION - CLASS II CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST TO BE TABLED Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that applicant has not submitted any additional information, therefore, staff and applicant request that this item be tabled. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Taylor, to table this apilicatiun. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. #1133 BETTY MINER 3830/3860 BAYSIDE ROAD SUBDIVISION - CLASS I CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Betty Miner and her agent, Larry Langhans, were present for this master. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that they received the additional survey information indicating no encroachments as previously thought. There were no comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Taylor, to recommend approval of the lot line rearrangement s�ibdivision as proposed. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. #1138 RONALD DEMSHAR ` 2821 CASCO PL. AT ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:51-9:05 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Ponald Demshar was present for this matter. Assistant. Zonincl Administrator- Gaffron explained the request to a) add second story to main body of house which currently has substandard setbacks on F)ot:h sides, b) remodel the portion of the house away from the lake to create an attached gaz age requiring .1 2'x31' addition to houc.e, and revise driveway; and c) construct a ground -level 12' x 24' deck on the lake side with a pc)rtio-) of E'.idewalk to connect to tho existing sidewalk 7 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMAlISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 #1138 DEMSHAR CONTINUED along side of the house. He reviewed the variances involved as follows: Side Setbacks - 2nd story - right side 5.6' (same as exists) 2nd story - left side 3.4' (same as exists) Addition - right side 9.2' (9.8' exists) Average lakeshore setback encroachment - 18' (same as exists) Hardcover -- 0-75' - 3.4% (same as exists) 75-250' 61.7% (52.9% currently exists) Gaff.ron noted that no comments have been rec Lved from the neighbors an(,, staff does not feel that the 2nd ' addition will hinder any of the neighbors view. Mr. Demshar noted that there are currently 50' pine trees on tl;e neighbor's property which obstruct the .•; ew. bellows asked applicant to explain his hardship for keeping the existing garage in addition to the new garage. Mr. Demshar stated that his basement is only 300 s.f., therefore the existing garage is need for additional storage and boat storage. Cohen stated he was uncomfortable with the additional hardcover and setting a precedent. He would consider recommending approval if the existing garage were removed. Chairman Kelley agreed with Cohen noting more storage room would be accomodated with the new 2nd story addition. Mr. Demshar asked if the Planning Commission would be amenable to allowing the existing garage to remain until the new construction is completed. Chairman Kelley felt that retaining the garage until construction was completed would not be a problen. He asked what the actual hardcover calculation would be if garage sre removed. Assistant. Zoning T,dmin?.strator Gaffron stated that if garage .were removed, the hardcover would increase by approximately 1.5% to total 94.44% 75-,' n' hardcover instead of the� 61.7W. 11 MINUTE'S OF THE PLANNING COWtISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 #1130 DEMSIIAR CONTINUED Assi_tant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted the photos submitted by the applicant of the Lakeshore which indicate an obvious need for some type of repair. Fie asked applicant what his intent was for lakeshore repair. Mr.. Demsh:ar stated he intends to eventually replace what exists. Assistant ZoT.ing Administrator Gaffron noted lakeshore repair work may or may not require a conditional use permit depending on exactly what changes applicant proposes. He noted that if a conditional use permit were required, it would involve a separate application. There were no comments from the public rid the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Cohen, to recommend approval subject to: 1) 54.4% maximum approved hardcover in 75-250' 2) existing garage removed by May 1, 1988 3) no additional hardcover will be approved on this property Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. #1139 JIM 6 BONNIE LEAR 2525 DUNWOODY AVENUE VARIANCE PTJBLIC HEARING 9:07-9:21 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Jim Lear and his general contractor, Mike Schroeder, were present for this matter. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request to construct an addition to an existing residence which would extend to within 4' of the Existing gerage. Because the code requires a 10' separation between a principal building and accessory structure, applicants propose to attach the two structures by constructing a roof between them. He reviewed the following variances and facts: Hardcover - 0-75' 2.42t - no change proposed 75-250' - 28.70 existing - proposal is for equal tradeoff ( no not increase) 1 0-500'- 11.17% existing - no change proposed z 13 `F C' r ING R1t�Y � U TO: Mayor Grabek i5B7 Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardsonj Q FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Ypn/ Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: May 21,1987 SUIIJ- #1139 James Lear, 2.525 Dunwoody Avenue - Variance/ Resolution - st of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Planning Commission Minutes 5-4-87 C - Planning Commission Action Notice 5-5-87 D - Memo & Exhibits of 4--28-87 Discussion - Please review the memo and exhibits of 4-28-87. Applicant propose; to construct an addition to his existing residence, which will result in about 600 s.f. of additional structure but only 165 s.f. of new hardcover, which will be totally offset oy removal of other hardcover. The proposal also involves an average setback encroachment but only an insignificant actual encroachment on neighboring view lines. Additionally, a variance is technically needed because the house will be attached to the garage by a "breezeway" type connection, and the existing garage is less than 10' from the side lot line. At their 5-4-87 meeting, Planning Commisison recommended aproval of the req!iested variances for hardcover (no increase), side setback, and average setback, finding that the side se*back variance .is bei,iq granted because the garage was constructed too close to the lot line in error. Because of the concerns exrressed by the southerly neighbor about potential for rental or living area usage of the storage room above the garagc. Planning Commission recommended the condition that the garage area may not be used a5 human living quarters (dogs excepted!). Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval in accordance with the Planninq Commission recommendation per the attached resolution. City of ()11()NO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCI',. NO. A RESOL".ION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODI: SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) AND SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 S 2 FILE #1139 WHEREAS, James Lear (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property locatod at 2525 Dunwoody Ave. within the City of Orono (he: ^inafter "City") and legally described as follows: I:ot 9, Block 6. Townsite of Langdon Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"), and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance: to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.25, Subdivision 6 (E) and 10.22, Subdivision 1 & 2 to allow the construction of a residence addition which will result in 28.57% hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed; and which addition: when connecter' to the existing detached garage will result in a side setback of (.71 where 10' side setback is normally required; and which addition will. constitute a 28' Encroachment into the average Lakeshore setback where no encroachment is normally allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1'39. 2. The property is located in the LR-1C Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Pldnning Commission reviewed this application on May 4, 1987, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: a) TLe proposed addition will result in a 3 degree reduction in the field of view of the lake from the neighboring property. This reduction is insignificant because that view is already blocked by dense shrubbery. Page 1 of City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. b) The applicant proposes to remove 165 s.f. of existing hardcover in the 75-250' zone to compensate for the 165 s.f. of additional hardcover to be created as a result of the proposed addition. This will result in no net increase in hardcover over the 28.57% hardcover existing in the 75-250' zone. c) The prop -,sed addition will conn ct the house with the existing detached garage which is located 6.7' from the side .ot line. The Planning Commission finds that the side setback variance is appropriate only because of the location of the existing garage, _he substandard side setback cif which resulted from an error in the previous ow„er's determination of the location of the property boundary. d) The partially finished room over the garage when constructed was never intended for use as human living quarters as evidenced by the previous owner's written statement, hence in conjunction with the side setback variance it is appropriate to place the condition that the garage may not be fitted with plumbing, nor may it be used as human living quarters. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of -.he Planning Commission, reports by city staff, comments by tie applicant and the effect of the proposed --ariance o.i trie health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Counci 1 finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to pre- serve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of th.a City. page 2 -)f 5 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orcno City Council hereby grants d variance to the Municipal Zoning Code Section 1.0.25, Subdivision 6 (B) and Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 & 2 to allow the construction of a residence addition which will result in 28.5% hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed; and which addition when coanectc(l to the existing detached garage will result in a side setback of 6.7' where 10' side setback is normally required; and which addition: will constitute a 28' encroachment into the average lakeshore setback where no encroachment is normally allowed subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall remove 165 s.f.of hardcover in the 75- 250' lakeshore setback zone prior to final inspection of the addition, in order that hardcover In that zone will remain at or below 28.572 (6250 s.f.) as shown on Exhibit A attache-::. 2. The garage area and the room above it may become heated space but sh:11 nct be fitted with plumbing and shall not be used as hurtan living quarters. 3. Applicant is advised that no additional hardcover will be approved for this property, any future proposals to add hardcover will not be approved, but might be approved only with concurrent. removals of existing hardcover resulting in no net increase in hardcover. 4. Applicant is advise1 that the shed located near the lakeshore in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone is considered to be a non -conforming structure and subject to the pertinent ordinances. governing such structures. S. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (May 26, 1988). 6. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority vranted herein, and shell be punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 3 of 5 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 7. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and ;:-!re-- by agrees to the terms of this resolution and on beha1 of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on th s 26th day of May, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor i1) Property Owner 1 MINUTES OF Ti'.L PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1907 d DF-14SRAR CONTINUED Assistant 'Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted the photos submitted by the applicant of the lakeshore which indicate an obvious need for some type of repair. He asked applicant what his intent was for lakeshore repair. Mr. Demshar stated he intends to eventually replace what exists. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted lakeshore repair work may or may not require a conditional use permit depending on e-actly what changes applicant proposes. lie noted tt. if a conditional use permit were required, it would involve a separate application. There were no comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kellcy, seconded by Cohen, to recommend approval subject to: 1) 54.4% maximum approved hardcover in �5--250' 2) existing garage removed by May 1, 1!188 3) no additional hardcover will be approved on this property Motion, Ayes 5, Nays #1139 JIM 6 BONNIE LEAR 2525 DUNWOODY AVENUE VARIANCE PUBLIC HFJJZTNG 9:07-9:21 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Jim Lear and his general contractor, Miks: Schroeder, were present for this matter. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request to construct an addition to an existing rf!sidence which would extend to within 4' of the existing garage. Because the code requires a 10' separation between a principal building and accessory structure, applicants propose to attach the two structures i)y conscructing a roof between them. He rE viewed the fol low4 rq variances and facts: Hardcover - 0-75' 2.442% no change proposed 75-250' - 28.7% existinq - proposal. is for equal tradeoff (no net increase) 250-500'- 13.17% existing - no change proposed M MINUTES OF TUB PI.IINNING COMMISSION r1AE1-',TING HELD MAY R, 1937 LIJNR CONTINUED Side Setback -- The proposal is to attach the existing garage to the house via a covered walkway. `:he existing garage is 6.7% from the side lot line. Technically, there is no change to existing structure or existing side setback, except that what was a detached garage will now be attached, still encroaching into the required 10' side setback. Average Lakeshore Setback - There is no additional stance encroachment over and above the existing 28' average setback line encroachment, but there is a 3 degree reduction in sideward views from the house to the south. Those views are already screened with existing vegetation so that the additional view encroachment is insignificant in staff's opinion. Bill Hu lt.gren of 2545 Dunwoody, neighbor to the south, stated that he has reviewed the plans and has no objections. However, his only concern is any future use of the garage which is built too close to the property line. He would like some assurance that the garage and upper garage area will not be turned int.c, living quarters. His reason is that it would be less than 20' from their train bedroom area. Mr. Lear stated that he area as living quarters position. He intends to a small space heater in strictly as garage use inside during the day. y.rage, he plans to use i does not intend on using this and undFrstand., Mr. Hultgrer.'s sheetrocx, insulate and provide the garage which will be use in addition to keeping dogs Regarding the area above the t for a small train hobby room. M.ke Schroeder reviewed the interior and exterior plans. There were- no other comet-nt s from • he public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, to recomend approval subject to: 1. No additional hardcover will be allowed on the property. 2. The garage and upper garage area will not be plumbed nor be used as full time living space. 0 MINUTES OF THE• PLANNING COHM.ISSION MJ:L:TING UELD MAY 4, 1987 LF:AR C014TINUED Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaff.ron stated he had concerns with controlling the future use of the garage once it is attacr.ed to the mein residence. He suggested another alternative of granting a 4' variance between accessory structure and residence, therefore not connecting the two structures but providing firewall as needed, which would eliminate any future problems. Mr. Schroeder stated that they would be in favor of Gaffron's suggestion because that s what trey originally intended. Mr. Lear concurred. Bellows questioned the viability and expense involved in firewalling the garage with a gambrel roof thus creating a fire hazard. She nr� d that in order to avoid precedent setting, is shk be stated in the resolution that this variance is be_ granted only because of an error in the o-igina 1 sui vey which resulted in the "Ar-4e being placed too close to the lot line. Cht -man Kelley withdrew his previous motion. It *as moved by Bellows, seconded by Johnson, to recommend approval of hardcover, side setback, and average setback variances as props ed, finding that side setback variance is being granted only because gare;ge was constructed too close to the lot line in error, subject to the condition that the garage area may become heated space but may not be plumbed and may not be used as living quarters. Motion., Ayes 6, Nays 0. — 01140 TOM BERTHIAUMB 3035 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIAi3CE PUBLIC HEARING 9:33-9s34 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Tom Berthiaurie was present. for this matter Assistant 7.onina Ad:r:.inistrator Gaffron expl,:ined the request to construct P 2nd story bedroom and bathroom addition cver the exi<;tinq garage which is 7.1 feet from the side lot line and staff finds there will be no view encroachmcr':t frc;r. the Addition. Staff recommends approva l . j'f, fir•.' t,t E ric .,,t I,t fr n r thr, pu'':Z<: t: garc'_ing this : l a (ire F'>l. , s r. , Ayes 6, Nays ZONING FILE. NO. 1139 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 5/5/87 ----------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Jim Lear COPIES TO: M.F. Schroeder II, Inc. 2525 Dunwoody Avenue 3324 75th Avenue North Wayzata, MN 55391 Brooklyn Park, MN 55443 TYPE OF APPLICATIO": XX Variance ------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING 5/4/87 VOTE: 6 F)r 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: XX Approval: subject to conditions noted below NO1- D SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Recommended approval of variances for hardcover, side setback, average setback as proposed, finding that side setback variance is being granted only because garage was constructed too close to the lot line in error. Subject to the condition that the garage area may become heated space but m iy not be plumbed and may not be used as living quarters. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: Council May 26, 1987 If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: April 28, 1987 Subject: #1139 Jim Lear, 2525 Dunwoody Avenue -- Variance - Public Hearing Application - Hardcover, side setback, average setback variances to contruct addition to residence. Zoning District - LR-1C, �-acre List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List/Neighbor Acknowledgements Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Hardco-er Calculations - Applicant Exhibit F - Hardcover Calculations - Staff Review Exhibit G - Survey With Staff Sketches of View Lines Pertinent Facts - Hardcover - 0-75': 2.42% existing - no changes proposed 75-250': 28.57% existing - proposal. is for equal tradeoff (no net increase) 250-500': 13.17% existing - no changes proposed Side Setback - Note: The proposal. is to attach the existing gar, to the house via a covered walkway. The existing garage is 6.7' from the side lot line. Technically, there is no change to existing structure or existing side setback, except that what was a detached garage will now be attached, still encroaching into tie required 10' side setback. Average Lakeshore Setback - There is no additional distance encroachment over and above the existing 28' average setback line encroachment, but there is a 30 reduction in sideward views from the house to the south. Those views are already screened with existing vegetation so that the additional view encroachment is insignificant in staff's opinion. I)i scubsion - This is a request to construct an addition to an existing residence. The proposed addition would extend to within 4' of the existing garage. Because Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 in effect requires a 10' separation between a prircipal building and an accessory structure, the applicants are proposing to attach the two structures by constructinq a roof between them. G-)ni.ng File #1139 April 28, 1987 Page 2 of 4 Issue I - Attachment of Structures Reading through Subdivision 12, the definitions Section 10.02, and the remainder of the Zoning Code, there is absolutely no direction as to whether this type of attachment is sufficient to allow the two structures to be considered "attached" for any or all purposes. Building Inspector, Tom Jacobs, notes that the uilding Code does not set a minimum distance between buildings, but does require various types of f.irewalls between them depending on the actual separation distance. He also suggests that in order to attach structures solely through a roof connection, the roof connection should be at least 36" in width, and must serve a purpose, i.e. in this case creates a covered walkway between two access doors. Tom feels that from a Building Code standpoint, the roof connection proposed does constitute attaching the structures. From a zoning standpoint, staff is uncomfortable with this type of attachment in relation to Subdivision 12, only because the intent of that section is not totally clear. We have always felt that the 10' structure - to -structure setback atandard was for emergency access purposes, but does _t also serve an aesthetic purpose? is that why it has an exception built- in, i.e. exempting "integral parts of the principal. structure" °rom the requirement? What is the definition of an "integral part of the principal building"? Staff's main concern is that we do not want to set a precedent that would result in frivolous connections between buildings to get --ound the 10' setback requirement. Is Planning Commission comfortable wit.. the current proposal? Does Planning Commission wish to consider a future zoning amendment that better defines "attachment" of structures, and/or better defines the purpose of Subdivision 12? If Planning Commission is comfortable with the method of attachment, staff would request that Planning Commission address what types of attachment might riot be suitable. If Planning Commission is uncomfortable with the method of attachment because it in effect is "getting around the. Code requirerent", then are there any hardships or unusual circumstances about this case that suqqest a structure -to -structure setback variance is appropriate? Issue II - Side Setback Note that the garage as it exists is 6.7' from the lot line. It was constructed a few years aqo to replace a pre vicus garage. At that time, staff did not require a survey since the property owners had agreed to where they thought the lot 1 inc was located and the proposed garage was 10' from that line. If t'ie garage is considered as being attached, the the principal structure becomes substandard in side setback anti technically a variant is required. If the garage is not attached, then perhaps an after-t -fact variance is afpropriate: to gr.4nt. . . In either case, the effect t the neighborinq property is negiigibl,- because the garage is there ant ,ias t)e�en thvr(-. Note that under current policy, we would require a survey to, construct a dotac•hv,d rjar, (je, avoidinq the situation encountered with this application. Zoning File #11.39 April 28, 1987 Page 3 of. 4 Issue III - Hardcover Hardcover tradeoffs are proposed to result in no net increase in 75- 250' hardcover. Applicants propose to remove 165 s.f. of concrete hardcover behind the garage in exchange for the 165 s.f. of net hardcover to be added with the proposed addition. Most of the addition is over existing structure or stone and concrete w.-alkways. Issue IV - Average Lakeshore Setback - Viewlines Technically, the proposed addition encroaches no further lakeward from the average setback line than the existing house. Looking at the partial additional view encroachment from the southerly property, staff notes that from the side window view as shown in Exhibit G, at most a 30 view encroachment is encountered. There is already dense vegetation screening those views, Such that staff feels that the impact on neighbors' view encroachment is very slight. Staff recommends approval of the variance. Issue V The neighbors to the south expressed a concern that they did not want the, storage space above the existing garage to become living space because of the potential for its rental use and for loud parties. Applicant wishes to insulate and sheetrock the garage so that it can be heated for use as a hobby room and for his dogs to stay in. There is no plumbing apparent in the garage. Staff would note that if the garage is considered attached, we have no real concern whether or not it is finished off and heated. However, we would not be comfortable allowing plumbing in it under the proposed attachment method nor could we allow it to be used as a separate guest apartment without a conditional use permit. Staff would recommend wording be placed in the resolution that will. advise the applicant that the room over the garage cannot be used as a dwelling unit and cannot be plumbed unless it is attached to the main house via a heated co, ridor; and that future use as a guest apartment would require a conditional use permit as well as various modifications to the methc.d of attachment.. Summary of Staff Recommendation - Issue I - Planning Commission must determine whether it vonsiders the structures attached or detachecl, and should address the standards for attachment for future reference. if they are detached, Planning Commission should determine whether there are sufficient hardships or unusual. circumstances to warrant a structure-to-struCture setback variance (4, proposed where 10' is reyu i reel ). Issue iI - Staff rec_•ommendF. approval cf a side setback variance, given that the garage is a l rt•t+dy eyj �;t i riej tat .:a r-uh-;t,andard setback. Issue III - :staff recomrlorid:, :Ippra,v a l ,f th,, variance to allow 28.57% hardcover with the proposed tr.,ido(_4f. 1-1,inninq COmmissi )n may wish to consider addit i onca tradeoff-!-; to rt>du(a c f� a i .lca,vc>r even mor , so that there 1 s a net decreasi, ( 1$ R 220 f. 1, Zoning File #1139 April 29, 1987 Page 4 of 4 Issue IV - Staff recomninds approval of the average lakeshore setback variance, finding that the additional encroachment (30) on existing view lines is relatively minor in light of the existing vegetation and actual views from the neighboring property. Issue V - Staff recommends that wording be placed in the resolution to be filed with the chain of title that will advise applicant of the limitations on use of the garage area as living space. F , • ,i (_ '-0 uace fie u -► _7 d t Fee /a L'. v-) Receipt X Initials )- CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50,00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P. I . D.) 1% o - i t Z �Z-10 o 8 Please check one - Is the property abstract or torrens7 Attach legal description to app?.ication if not included on required survey. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address: s.: ��:'. r', 1 city: _t'rr `� %� �; Zip -------------------------------------------------------�1-------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) '171 7 31C Name _`T,/! 1 - /_ &Ak_�_ Phone (work) J-z Z a 4` S Address. Z�'� �ti%,:-✓ArL;+• i4'�. City: � '; �' Zip: 539/ Date Property Acquired /�//'�,� ' yk'% (month/year ) I (do) '(doonnot � also own the adjacent parcels of land. ----- ------- ---------------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPBRTY Present Zoning District e& Present Use of Property 41 1'�'i40WIL r' Residential Other (specify) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTIOM OF RMQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: �;h� r /l�.r. %�� -'�►f..� �a.��•✓AP, --------------------------------------------------------------------------- VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback Variances ( Lot Width Hardcover Front Side Rear) Other --------------------------------------------------------------------------- HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical. difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: — ----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCIIPTIGN OF UNUSUAI, PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe uisual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements, ---------- ---------------------------•------------------------------------- REQ'tIRF.D SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain this list from li,nnepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list witn no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat Map. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if th.: above information has not been included. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provi;e all information required or requested by the 'Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of th.Ls application, and certifies that the information supp'.ie'l is trite and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Appl i.cant Is Si gnature �` Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto t.Ye property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council. members for purposes of investiga- tion and verification of this request., Owner's Signature-4- LC�. D.tte _ ---------------------------------_--____ --`�'= ----------- Applicant. must have a 1 suiimittaIF, into th,. City offices 25 days before the Planninq Commission Meet i nrl. F l anni nq Comniis!;iun Meetings are held on the third Monday of c ach month. milSt lw< present at all scheduled review meetings of the Platlnlr.cj ckwirnis,, (ion ;ind Council, and, if an applicant is unabif, to ittend a ec►t eluicd moc' t lrq, to please make arrange- ments to have' .an ilUthori700 agf�Dt 'itt-rd in year glare and to advise the buildinq 6 7'onir`l officr of thiF� prior to the mee•tinq. " DATE 04/96/87 OATCH 012 38 20-117-23 21 0003 sm PROP AOOA 02480 OLSLMODY AVE 06040 NAME T & K KARGEL TAXPAYIR TERRY & KAREN KARSEL NAME/ADO01 2"S OUHLMODY AVE A MAYZATA MN 55391 Aft 38 20-1!7-23 21 9021 PPOP ADCs DZS44 DU►t40MY A'.E O4.lX* NAME KtAITE J WCPGAPO ET..L TAXPAYER KNUTE J NORGAPO NlME/ADOR ZS40 DLVZX pY AVE MAYZATA MH 55391 i. 38 20-117-23 22 0016 PROP ADM 02985 DIRLXMY AVE D 411111 NAME J & s Pmmps TAaPA►ER JAPES A POWERS Wan[/ADO11 2485 DUM13CODY AVE WAYZATA MIN 55391 PROP ADOR CtZftg NAME TAXPAYER TOTAL BATCH NAME/ADM O12 00009 10MEPI11 COUNTY PROPERTY IWORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OL44ERS LIST 38 20-117-23 21 0019 02500 DLR."AOODY AVE T J OGLAND & J K OGLAND TIMDTHY J & JULIE K OGLAFtO 2500 DU!dtOODY AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0030 02545 DU!"rM Y AVE DCtdALD 0 AKINS ET AL WILLIAM HULTGPEN 2545 DU!!-l!Y'DY AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 22 0017 02505 DUtL .*OOY AVE JAMES S NOnDLIE ET AL JAVIES S 1:'^0LIE I505 DU?4.'000Y AVE CNONO KA 553`:-1 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 32 38 20-117-23 21 0020 02520 DUMOODY AVE GALE HILL GALE HILL 2520 OU::::OODY AV WAYZATA tt:l 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0031 'vim OZ565 DL'!8 OOY AVE J & S NELSON - JERRY L NELSON 2565 O1R:.3GOAVE OPOT:O Y:N 55 55391 �L 3C 20-117-23 22 0018 f; 02525 DUNUOODY AVE - 0 & J CLONINGER DANIEL & JACQUELYN CLONINGER - 2525 VLP":OODY AVE ORCNO Mil 55391 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE Ate TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATICN AS 1T APPEARS THIS DATE CH THE RECOPn s OF THE HEiwiEPIN COL41TY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO jNE EEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND UELIEF. /% DATE /'1'1W.Y /// A. Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) of 24 5 DuNwcf)K print names)] Tprint address have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at Z.i;zS _)v61 -lee Y�✓, also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property car .ise but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware or f tre improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use r�aquires Council approval. I r Properlty Owner Property Owner 4 I ,,I�;7. Gate tiIIJ,s') Date -' If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form N I (we) ^( _ _ __�_ of 2 �S_ gvAlwoo� [pI¢r, int name(s)�— print address have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at ZSLS 1u(4-;,ao,9Y 9y, also referred to as Land Use Application No. I, (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (re) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbors project or use requires Council approval. i I" ;pei �Y Owner roperty Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Lard "-se Application, please submit our comments to the Building 6 Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to t, scheduled meeting date. LAKESHORE SETBACK ZONE 0-75' 75-.5)' 25C D.re^tic^s: A. Existing lot area in zone 1')15 tsf ORONO HARDCOVER CALCCLAI N WO EE '�r�✓ B. Existinq C. Existing D. Proposed E. Proposed F. Allowed hardcover hardcover hardcover hardcover hard_ove in zone Percentage in zone percentage Percent.; [(II:A) x 1001 [(�.A) x 1001 2 21 t sf _ 2. 4z % -zz-14 sf ZI, �1S±sf L2So t sf _ ZT. ! 7 - �;,5a sf 7 Vk ± sf IyI 3 t sf sf QS sf 2. 142_ ± / 28. 5 -7 - 13. I7 r , /of3 t sf /3. / J x, 0 ' , 25 3G 35 A. Existing Lot Area in Zone - includes the total square footage of dry buildable land within the specified zone. B. Existing Hardcover in Zone - includes the square footage of existing roofs, decks, sidewalks, driveways (gravel or paved) and other rain -impervious surfaces within the specified zcr.e. Existing Hardcover Percentage - divide the number in B by the number in _A and multiply by 100. Proposed Hardcover in Zone - includes the existing hardcover plus all reposed additional hardcover. E. Proposed Hardcover Percentages - divide the number in D by the number in A and :multiply by 100. F. Allowed Hardcover Percentages - if the percentages in column E for any setback zone exceed the allowed percentages in column F, you should contact the Zoning Department at 473-7357 to discuss the possibilities of obta;.ning a varian`A Generally, if a concurrent removal of existing hardcover matches the additional hardcover proposed, resulting in no net increase of hardcover in a specified zone, a variance may not be necessary. § 10.03 Subd. 1.2. Crowding Principal Building. No accessory building or structure, unless an integral part of the principal building, shall be erected, altered, or moved within ten feet of the principal building. Subd. 13. Garages. Accessory buildings which are for the storage of automobiles shall have the doors thirty feet or more from the property line when said doors face on a public alley or street. Subd. 14. Yards and Open Spaces. A. Deduction Prohibited. No yard or other open space shall be reduced in area or dimensions so as to make such yard or other open space less than the minimum required by the Zoning Chapter and if the existing yard or other open space as existing is less than the minimum required, it shall not be further reduced. B. Application to Only One swelling or Group. No required yard or other open space allc 3 to a building or dwelling group shall be used to satisfy yard, other open spaces, or minimum lot area requirements for any other building or dwelling group. Subd. 15. Non -Encroachments. The following shall not be considered to be encroachments on yard requirements: A. /Chimneys, flues, belt courses, leaders, sills, pilasters, lintels, ornamental features, mechanical devices, cornices, eaves, gutters and the like, provided they Oo not extend more than 1-1/2 feet,`off-street parking except as hereinafter regulated. B. Name plate signs for one family dwellings; lights for illuminating parking areas, loading areas or yards for s, safety and security purposeprovided the direct source of light Z is not vi:.ible from the public right-of-way or adjacent residential property may be located to within five feet of the front lot line. ' C. Fences which do rot exceed 3-1/2 feet in height, fences not over six feet in height along the front lot line of lake frontage lots which front on a major thoroughfare, terraces, steps, uncovered porches, stoops or similar structures, which do not —" extend above the height of the ground floor level of the principal building and extend to a distance of not less than two f-et from any lot line. ` D. In depth of two feet nor feet, fire escapes no :malls not to exceed a street parking. side or rear yards only, bays not to exceed a to contain �-n area of more than twenty square - t to exceed a width of three feet, fences and height of six feet above grade and open off- ORONO CC 256 (4-1-84) • J WS8*/9 bi I i Or IS n OlsbGi ^0C, Co nnC�O r r'f� dC'/� rfpS., p�F+s ��rs it f �r td�i 0;0 ��oi - `E Jr - ON& 3 r�'�•'it ems:'. .._.r�__ - - -= _' _ ".- 246 r fkee0, J' -4.w WSB'19' 33" C� S 11 LJI J� :� ♦ I• 24 �r Y o�r I,jr4., / A op, i �t3 `,/ OCT Co a"r �i 9 ^F r�S l0 c. r, f,S., O ifs /r �,l+�l�d /9' 33"E- f- 'k. V s8 • it *-ho le 2. z r • •ro \ o � Ma kD COVE t2 y f js -s m,�� j rr � 7, f''! ��/� ZC1 d C,, ^ Pr : • X. �jJo ri �j Y ICJQ 40 t �, �d fl � Q /� •\ • IZ °.i0 .E 1 16� Tk :I' * �M • w �✓, .Ash .:. �: is Z �� '_ .,u_ .� '"S•/• "R.: •- rv._.... ... . /.�.. y 't�.• � _ �. "sr' a • Nwlti ISdam, rr ~s1 `sr MAY 2 g 158 To: Mayor Grabek CITY OF No Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: May 19, 1987 Subject: #1140 Tom Berthiaume/Cherryl Kachenmeister, 3035 Casco Point Road Variance - Resolution List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Resolution Exhibit B - Planning Commission Action Notice of 5/6/87 Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 4/29/87 This is a request for side setback variance to construct a 2nd story bedroom and bath addition over the existing garage. Please review the memo and exhibits of 4/29/87. Planning Commission recommended 6-0 to approve as proposed at their 5/4/87 meeting. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval per the attached resolution. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE #1140 WHEREAS, Tom Berthiaume and Cherryl Kachenmeister (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 3035 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: All of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 394 except that part lying Northerly of the following described line: Beginning at the Southeasterly corner of Tract B in said Registered Land Survey; thence Southwesterly along a line drawn through a point on the base line as shown on said Registered Land Survey, 80 feet Northwesterly from its intersection with the Southeasterly line of said Tract A, to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, and there terminating, files of Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin, State of Minne,ota, (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a second story addition over the existing attached garage which is located 7.1' from the side lot line were a 10' side setback is normally required. NOW, THEREFORE., BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #11.40. 2. The property is located in the LR-lC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 4, 1987, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: A) The existing garage is 7.1' from the south side property line. B) Upward expansion rather than outward is the most appropriate method to expand the house given the relative narrowness of the lot and the existing hardcover percentage of 50-60%. Paw, 1. of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. C) There will be no resultant encroachment on any lake views from any neighboring property. D) There will be no significant impact on the quality or quantity of run-off to the lake as a result of this upward expansion. A. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds than: the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demon- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, t.;e Orono City Council hereby grants a variance per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a second story addition over the existing attached garage which is located 7.1' from the side lot line where a 10' side setback is normally required, subject to the following conditions: 1. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (May 26, 1988). 2. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a 17iolati.on of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 3. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of ':he property. Page 2 (1 A, City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 2bth day of May, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 4 ZONING FILE NO. 1140 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 5/6/87 ------------------------------------------------------------------ TO: Tom Berhtiaume COPIES TO: Cherryl Kachenmeister 3035 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55931 ------------------------------------------------------------------ TYPE OF APPLICATION: XX Variance ----------------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 5/4/87 VOTE: 6 For 0 Aga4nst Planning Commission recommends the following: XX Apprcval: as submitted NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Recommended approval of 2.9' side setback variance to construct addition above existing garage. ----------- ----------------------------------------------------- Applicant's text scheduled meeting is confirmed as: Council Mav 26. 1987 If ycu desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. To: Planning Commi _on Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: April 29, 1987 Subject: #1140 Tom Berthiaume/Cherryl Kachenmeister, 3035 Casco Point Road Variance - Public Hearing Application - Construct 2nd story bedroom/bath addition over portion of existing house with existing substandard setback. Zoning District - LR-lC, �-acre severed List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Pertinent Facts - Side Setback Application Plat Map Property Owners Survey List/Neighbor Acknowledgements Survey With Staff Sketch Existing Required Variance 7.1' 1.0' 2.9' or 29% View encroachment caused by addition: None Discussion - The applicants propose to construct a 2nd story bedroom and bathroom addition over the existing garage, which is 7.1 feet from the side lot line. There will be no resultant encroachment on any lake views of either neighbor.. There is no average setback encroachment. There is no additional hardcover proposed since the addition will be entirely above the existing garage. Note that applicant really has no expansion options e.ccept to go upward, since the lot is narrow and existing 75-250' hardcover appears to be in the range of 501 to 60% or higher. The neighboring house to the south is perhaps 40' from the applicants' residence, hence construction upward from the garage will pose no problems as far as structure -to -structure setback. In all respects, the proposed addition appears to be the most appropriate method to expand the house with ne significant impact on neighboring properties nor on the lake itsel Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval of the side setback variance to construct the second story audit ion as proposed. Fee_ Receipt__ _ Initials A-) CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each aOlitional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from origir application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ��Q.� ��� /�� iC U� Z- 11z &7Lz Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 20--Z r2 ,CL.�.i Please check one - Is the property abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (home) /,� Name Cf/iE/ ��/ ���f/I/tl �ClJ1�Ci` Pho-ie (work) 5 Z.5 - .,2Y/L Address 3CjS l!!s�'e' City d! Zip OWNER (if different than applicant.) Phone (home) Name (SC'/%/(c/ Phone (work) Address: City: Zip: Date Property Acquired r_ �� (month/year) I (do) coo notj� also own the adjacent parcels of land. ---------------------------------•------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPF.<TY Present �oninq District Present Use of Property �_,��,� I'Uk:YZ LXc"J21 if Residential.' Other (specify) --•----------------------------------------------------------------•--------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ ( Describe request in det.ail:�[�>ec✓�'.: ------_----------------z--- == =-__-------------------------------------- VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot. Area —Lot: Width _! Hardcover Setback Variances (_ Front >,� Side _ Rear) Other HARDSHIP Describe enforcem hardship practica ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property ,conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: C1C/51�//1 GZ!-rE_ S7/2'CC��C!/"f e717 ------------------------------------------------ -------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form A 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain this list frpm Hennepin County Qepertment of Finance A-603 Govt Center P I J 348-3271) • _o, ✓st%' .LEf-�' ��J�/�6t:s 3. Stampea, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat Map. (1�° �.'tE!�-/ ------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Officia''r Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATUR j'he applicant her•_b� -Tees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoni, Iministrator_, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses -ncurrea review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied _ true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's F ignature Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner herety ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonanie entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commis, ---ion members, and Council members for purposes of investiga- tion and verification of- is gyest. Owner's Signatur �� .rr ,'� '�1: Date --_---------------.i_�.�------ 4 -----, J------------------------------- Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planninq Commission: Meeti.nq. I'lanninq Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Appl icr,nts must be present at all scheduled review meet. i nq5 of the I' i inning comma ssinn and Council, and, if an ipplic,nt is unr,ble to attr,nd a -chedulf-A m-rting, to please make arrange- ments to have ,in authori?.ed agent attend in your place and to advise the taui iding 6 l.caninq Ciff icc. of this chr,nge prior to the rr,c,c•tinq. So 1140 SEC. POr P. H 7o R. 23 3 • _ S' uate feet 4s�0 d ° e9 ,G�� ,� •"' . L�Z•. •`�F� a 42 co EQ: • S ql F e1 �{� too Smelts tdwlelsn f Tj %' 4gt �� g r !• �pP.SDnn Ptrk Lots � Ek 1Af— ►p~ � wRi or +� .r,°a � C ' ay sec . ; 6, r\J ,� • R.L.S.4'k..; •, %1115. .t JAIEx$1) Ny,- o�t`l •zt• (1L� fa+)d-•e. , ;.CAS .,,.,� ►• of fir 11 vz p' tooa I10 Ipp IOe ItIf o .. ' n.:; yII?l AA.C•`v 106 '�•' r . A + ^ �0p6,S. 113 • .� �, • C ' ,, Qa.� 1r��.,� O �) R leo' f+ 4A lot NO 'v ��L��'i• I pail Int ^ „ �y.» '' 7.%,� ,.•'..� - v , � DES Iaj � •• r ..� tl ..9 �'It.I '•.1p�.4i � ` 't OP sI• R e- c '� g'Y•r -let GjQ i 34` 40 a ��1- 1 a'- '. s �.r• � t15- t � (1�� • � �'-._._=-et aA_ ' • �, ro, � � �O (1� `off .. , i'y`• F idjd Al A' �4�•41 i� �- 6. ; �'�,.w % 2 ���j ` �j� :� ..1 a •1 a . Se M�\ �3 L �q ` ` \ ' ; ..7 N to'!9 27.2gg5w IIO i so p, A' CzO, i�1 /3 H,�"`'t. \ J �1 \'� `� yS�,►* ' O�►1 1 I ,\ v 10s/5y 4 IOe ' �, (34i '•: / ��,A • �;' `' e o bpi'% 38 ate, a-S+ w VO i N yiLs / ,::�'r „e,.�i%1 )r` {$ 105 �ti �j,11f \ 1Q7 � 4 �' �, 1 � .�' i �J. �. ((.l� v f ' 173 �q/� .\ 9T 1 108 a �l6� 0 7 ' fa vL// 1T4/ 'p98 cotO5 °� \tiJ)f' a',g� .A..� ' /�N< < vl ,\ y! 0�� '1T81°� I iy, 95 t. 104 .r �� l�J� p . p / T 1 i, 94 \,\rC .� 1 .rw ~' i : / Ci 1 r�ifJ %18 178 �O� J+i l 180 92 1 rs pe ' ��s R• SA . �. � \.,� ; ''. L l3'� ' lel t°�tif °'� ,� •`• �3 Lq 3 , A •i 50 A�10Z°`'�'d� r� �0 ii183`( PL 3 ° ;q 9 .••�'' :+" r`a �,�, . •. ,• s � � _i .1u , - - ti ES � ;�" Le a' � ' . e •49_� 160 C2 "'�'•Q r�l�• I, 159Q a�at�,�''iy 165 ° $ o s f _ r, ` GH' 12 158 �J J��1/ 166 � �A + ��,j• i57'�167 10 A ;�16 ,6 ,a�1� P� 60 .� b. .5 L 151� j tACP OV' �O im i / • s0 GAP Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) S _ t a of CSc U I'o? [� j - print name(s) [print address have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at Application No. also referred to as Land Use I (we) understand -hat in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to decl-re approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property IWner roperty Owner Date Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review -f this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) _7 . C L iv l ,- 1._ of print name(s) [print address have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at `7> �` f�`�s also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Property Owner Date Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Applicat )n, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning office at. least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) :t -� �L i 1b. CN4\1, `= of �( `� 1�` print n me(s) ] [print address have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of. the property located at �L._ �� O.ASC- C k, �Y, also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Propertg Owner Prope�ljy Owner y-/ V-,f7 Date _ 4-A- �z Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. AdjacentPropertyProperty ,�1Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (We) �l�i,{ y (• l\f� of -� L CA --SCU 1 print 'name (s ) print address have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at e 35 k�also referred to as Land Use App]_ication No. I. (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property O,wnner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. Certificate of Survey for Thomas B. Berthiaume in Tract A, Registered land Survey No. 394 Hennepin County, Minnesota the Southeasterly corner of Trtc- I: along a line drawn through a point on t�-' :<r feet Northwester y from its intersection with the Southeasterly ltme ;s ✓ there terminating, fires of Registrar of Titles, County- of Hennepin, if any, thereon. It does not purport to show any other- improvement; COFFIN 0 Iron marker Stile: 1 inch 40 feet Mark s_--'go t1al�.,_•.-._.•aril 7. �nfw _ �^':-- _....__� Certificate of Survey for Thomas B. Berthiaume in Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 394 Hennepin County, Minnesota 1 fl �.� &P Ale IL10 ,1 Zb AP I hereby certiry Lndt lnis iS a true ano correct a survey of the boundaries of All of Tract A, Registered L- 394 Except that part lying Northerly of the follow,ng Jescribed lir the Southeasterly corner of Tract B in said Registered Land Su*vey; thence al ng a line drawn through a point on the base line as shown on said Registered Lar feet Northwesterly from its intersection with the Southeasterly line of said Tract A, to the shore of Lake Min there terminating, files of kegistrar of Titles, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, and of the location c if any, thereon. It does not purport to show dry other improvements or encroachments. COFFIN & GkONBERG, INC. o Iron marker Scale: 1 inch = 40 feet Nark S. Gronberg NN. Lic. No. 12755 n.+- •nail 7 Inns N1AY ? 031987 TO: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members ORONO City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: May 21, 1987 SUBJECT: #1141 Karlton Gempler/Maria Ives, 1955 Eagerness Point Rd - Variance - Resolution LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit A - Resolution Exhibit B P.C. Minutes 5-4-87 Exhibit C - P.C. Action Notice 5-5-87 Exhibit D - Memo & Exhibits Of 5-1-87 DICUSSION This is a request to construct a deck and a tuckunder garage with one story above it. The application originally also included a 2nd story above the southerly 1/3 of the existing house, but that portion of the proposal has been withdrawn. Please review the memo and exhibits of 5-1-87. The Planning Commission was in favor of the project, but felt that the proposed 350 s.f. deck was excessive. Because the applicant's plan shows the width of house between the two lakeside glass doors to be 231, the Planning commission motion to approve was for a 23'x10' or 230 s.f. deck, which would result in a 0-75' hard- cover increase from 14.2% existing to 17.3% (instead of 19.9% proposed). That motion resulted in a 3-3 split vote. The Planning Commission members voting 'No', did note that they woul generally be in favor of a widened stairway so that the glass doors did not. just "walk out to nothing". STAFF RECOMMENDATION Given the split recommendation by Planning Commission, staff has, drafted a resolution reflecting the terms of the Planning Commission motion. This resolution will be redrafted at Council direction if differing terms and conditions are ultimately approved by the Council. Cite of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECT1 3N 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8, AND 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 AND 2 FILE #1141 WHEREAS, Karlton Gempler and Maria Ives (hereinafter "the applicants") have an interest in the property located at 1955 Fagerness Point Road within the CiLy of Orono (hereinafter. "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 9, Fagerness, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 & 2 to construct a deck constituting excessive hardcover and structure in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone where no structure or hardcover is normally allowed, and which deck will encroach approximately 2' into the average lakeshore setback zone where no encroachment is normally allowed; and to construct a tuckunder garage and 1-story addition which constitutes excess hardcover in the 75- 250' lakeshore setback zone where only 25€ Hardcover is normally allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE;, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1141. 2. The property is located in the LR-lC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on Hay 4, 1987, and recommended approval of the pr osed variance based upon the following findings: A) The pruposed deck will be at ground level with no railing, and therefore will. cause no encroachment on any views enjoyed by neighboring property owners. B) Proposed hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone is 17.3�, an increase of 3.1% from the ex_ sting 14.2%. Concurrently, applicant proposes to remove various existing structures and hardcover in 75-250' zone to re(,uce the hardcover in that zone from 37.7% to 32.5%. pale 1 of 5 City of OR,ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO, C) The hardcover added by the 1.0'x23' de:.k is justified by the need to have a suitable area in order to exit from the proposed lake side doo*:wav, and is justified by the concurrent proposed reduction i.n overall hardcover in the 75--250' setback zone. D) The proposed removal of the existing garag,a and construction of a tuckunder garage will create a safer access to Eagerness Point Road. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants 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 zoni i district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor po3e a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necess.sry to alleviate a demon- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary, to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER A14D CONDITIONS Based the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 & 2 and Section 10.5:, Subdivision 8 to allow the construction of a 10'x23' deck within the 0-75' lak-_shore setback zone, which will increase the hardcover in that zone to 17.3% where no hardcover or structure is normally allowed, and allowing such deck to encroach approximately 7.' into the average lakeshore setback zone where no encroachment is normally allowed; and to allow the construction of a one-story addition with tuckunder garage in the 75-250' lakeshore se0)ack zone, resulting in 75-250' hardcover of 32.5% where only 25% hardcover is nc,rmal.ly al lowed, subject to the following conli*ions: 1. The 2''xl0' deck ppro ed is intended to replace an existing 5.5'x5.3' concrete stairway structure which will t>c removed. Applicant shall remove the existing q:;rage, Fhed and hardco�,er items as shown on Exhibit "A" attached, prior to issuance of :1 Certificate of Occupancy for the residence, ant] applicants may no-- occupy the additions until ::,uch certificate is issuErd. Fln,ll hardcover on the propf rty !.:ha11 he as foIlows : Ilaqu ? cif 5 City of ORO►NO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY CGUNCIL NO. 0-75' Zone (Area = 5,625 s.f.) House Portion 640 s.f. Concrete Steps 4.7'x6.0' 30 s.f. Lakeshore Stairs 75 s.f. New Deck 23'x10' 230 s.f. 975 s.f. or 17.3% 75-250' Zone (Area = F,400 s.f.) House Portion 750 s.f. Addition With Tuckunder 682 s.f. Driveway 1,000 s.f. Patio 221 s.f. Sidewalk 75 s.f. 2,72Fs s.f. or 32.5 (See Exhibit "A") 3. The 23'x10' deck shall be construct.:--:) over a sand base, and shall have no plastic liner, in order to maintain the absorptive capacity of ground below the deck. 4. Applicant is advised that no addit.icnal hardcover will be approved on this property, and future proposals to increase hardcover will rot be approved, but might } approved only with concurrent removals of existing hardcover, res-1-ing in no net increase in hardcover. 5. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property no with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the bate of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (May 26, 1988). 6. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 7. The undersigned applicant!, have read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of 'hemselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to t.ht. . ecording of this resolution in the chain of titic of the property. 1-11r, ? of Clty Of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL z.. Adopted by the Orono Citv Cou..c.il on this 26th day of Ma-. 1987. ATTFF'" t L.-,rothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Jainc R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) AiNUTES OF THE PLANN'rNG COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 KARI-ON GEFIPLER/MARIA IVES ," FAGERNESo L OINT ROAD jIANCES ,•t;B3.•1C HEAtiING 9:34-9:57 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request for hardcover, lakeshore setback, and average lakeshore setback: variances to construct a tuckunder garage and grvu,id level deck. He reviewed the following facts: Hardcover: 0-75' - 14.2% existing, 19.9% proposed • 75-250' - 37.7% existing, 32.5% proposed (net decrease overall of 121 s.f. on property, Structure: a) Proposed 350 s.f. deck, ground le all ith4• 0-75' setback zone. b) P. :osed 1-story plus tuckunder garage on sti,iet side of house. Prorr-sal is .(, removal existing garage/shed/drivew rO -lace with new driveway. Karlton Gempler and Maria Ives were pre&<ent ror this ma.ter. Mr. Gempler showed the proposed plans noting that initially they proposed a 2nd story addition In the .pplication which they have now eliminated. Taylo! .questioned the afforded lake view from the proposed ground level deck due to the trees and shrubs. y Gempl. _ state,-? that Wine tree has to be removed bc::ause it `ias dutch elm and he plans to cut back the existing shr bs. •,licant was idviseu that a c-oditional use permit is -tired for ai grading within the 0-75' 3 that any �s in excess c ' S" may not be removed without a fet - issued by City and must be re, -)laced with replacemi.-nts \with exception of dead t:.-e(s). Planning Ccmmj_ �.' _ ,, dis._u.- ;rd any alto, ves -f 350 s.f. (..ock in the zon-. blr. Cem—ler suggested i_hc' use vt sar ' t.r wood chips ust:'i under deck with no plastic.: allowed. F_s�irta. t ..o, ing P- inivtratrator Gaff ron noted that those %-,ci-e two 4. c aces )n Fagerness Point i.n whist: this vas -.pprove(,, novievc--, ouncl i has c-onsistently rc' octed th � S 4.1ter,iat i ve in the pest t..o years. ,.:; OF THE PIANNING COW-IISSION NEETING IIELD MAY 4, 1 1 _k.oPLhR/IVES CONTIM-4ED Johns�in felt applicant was entitled to have a deck to enjoy the lake and there is no Wither location for placement. Chairman.Kelley felt the deck was excessive and suggest -1 t;ie alternative of allowing a widened _'-airway to be stalled to allo use of the two propose '. glass doors gnat axist from the lake side of the house a few feet above ground level. Bellows and Cohen concurred. Mi. Gempler st,!ted that with no deck, entertaining would have to be provided on the grass area, and after a time, no grass area would be left. Taylor suggested and compromise between the .tairs and a 350 s.F. deck. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron adjusted the 0-75' hardcover calculation if deck were only 230 s.f.as follows: final 17.3% hardcover as posed to the proposed 19.9%, based on the 23' distance between outside of proposed doors and a 10' width. John Waldron, 1951 Concordia St, adjacent property owner was present for this review, but made no comments. There were no other comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Taylor, seconded by Jot, on, to recommend approval subject to reducing the size of '-.re ground level deck to 230 s.f. to be construc+-ed w' a sand bz. se with no plastic liner in order to .aai. Ln absoY ion capacity of ground below deck. Motion, P.yes 3, Ns,, . 3. Kelley, Bellows, and Cohen voted nay because no hardship was proven to justify the size of deck proposed, but they would be willing to allow the widened stairway as suggested. Motion resulted in a split vote. C 110 : CUR JOHNSOU 2024 SHAD' .,JD R''?AD VAP.IAPICE REQUEST Ft R ADDITIO AL SITVIT- Curtis on •::ni F,_,m Wi 1 iette were present for this :natter . .:.,;sistant Zoning Administrator Gaffrun eyp'ained that r. Johnson rc�.quc-tr, F]anning Comm�_sE;ion rive additional considerc.t. ion tc. ni s 4 oposF ] placement of a second !,tor,, deck pa:;t the average housf: setback line because the-i i.! a distinct hardship placed on his 1.3 ZONING FILE NO. 1141 CITY OF ORONO NOTIOR OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 5/5/87 ------------------------------------------------------------------ TO: Karlton Gempler/Maria Ives COPIES TO: 9735 Dorset Lane Ake Ronnkvist Eden Prairie, MN 55344 4484 West Arm Road Spring Park, MN 55384 TYPE OF APPLICATION: XX Variance -------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 5/4/87 VOTE: 3 For 3 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: XX Approval: subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL C01MITIONS: Motion resulting in 3-3 split vote was as follows: I. Approval of proposed hardcover increases/removals in 15-250, zone resulting in hardcover decrease from 37.7% to 32.5%. 2. Approval of a new ground -level deck in the 0-75' setback zone not to exceed 230 s.f. (23'x10'), for a final 0-75' hardcover of 975 f.. (17.3%) as follows: Existing House Portior 640 s.f. Existing Concrete Steps 30 s.f. Existing Lakeshore Stairs 75 s.f. ''ew Deck* 2.3'x 10' 230 s.f. 975 s.f. * Deck to be constructed over a sand base with no plastic liner, to maintain ai.)sorptive capacity of ground below deck. The dissenting opinion was that no hardship was given to justify the size of deck proposed. However, the 3 dissenters did note they would certainly allow a widened stairway to be installer to allow use of the two proposed glass doors that exist from the lake side of the house a few feet above ground level. Ono additional comment: PleaEe review your need for a walkway to get. from clriv(-w=iy to entryway - was this included in your plan-..? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Applicant's next scheduAed rectinq is confirmed as: Counci 1 Mav 26, 1987 Tf you (lesire certific(I coF_>i s of the official Planning C'onirrissir)n mii.utes, they are ay.3ilabl.e from the City Recorder after review and approval by t!io 111anniny Commission. To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: May 1, 1987 Subject: #1141 Karlton Gempler/Mari.a Ives, 1955 FagPrness Point Road - Variance - Public Hearing Application - Variances for hardcover, lakeshore setback, average lakeshore setback to construct tuckunder garage, 2nd story addition, and ground level deck. Zoning District - LR-lC, �-acre sewereu List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application, Letter of Request Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey - Existing Configuration Exhibit E - Survey - Proposed Layout Exhibit F - Hardcover Calculation Exhibit G - Staff Review of Hardcover Calculations 9 Pertinent Facts Allowed or Hardcover: Existing Proposed Required Variance 0-75' 14.2% 19.9% 0% 19.9�- 75-25C' 37.7% 32.5% 25% 7.5t Net decrease overall of 121. s.f. on property Structure: 1. Proposed 350 s.f. deck, ground level, all within 0-75' setback zone. 2. Proposed 2nd story addition over portion of existing house, partially in 0-75' zone. 3. Proposed 1-story plus tuckunder garage on street side of house. Proposal is to remove existing garage/shed/driveway and replace with new driveway. Discussion - Issue I. Second stoLy,ov!�I" -(o. tion of existing house. This second story will be over existing structure. this addition will not encroach into the average jakerahore setback but is within the 0-75' zc...e. The second story will cause no v i sua l encroachment from any neighboring properties. The houf;e meets the si:le setback requirements. Staff recommends approval of the second story addition. Zoning File #1141 May 1, 1987 Page 2 of 2 Issue II. :Qck in 0-75' setback zone - constitutes a 0-75' hardcover increase of 320 s,f., or from 14.2% to 19.9%. The deck is proposed to be at ground level and while it will encroach into the average setback zone, it will cause no visual encroachment. The ground is very f lat for about 25' lakeward from the house, then plunges down a steep slope to the shore- line. The City Council has consistently considered decke. as hardcover. Approval of the 10x35' deck as proposed would be inconsistent with other similar applications where 0-75' decks have been typically requ -d to be kept to a minimum. Staff recommends that applicant be requested to address: hardships or unusual circumstances that justify the 0-75' deck hardcover variance. Issue III. 75-250' Hardcover. Applicant proposes to build a new tuckunder garage with 1 story uhave it, and plans to remove the existing garage, shed, driveway, and much of the flagstone, replacing this with a longer driveway. The net result is a decrease in 75-250' hardcover from 37.7% down to 32.5%, and also removes some substandard structures. Staff f ee 1 s thi s wi 11 be an overa 1 1 improvement to the property and recommends approval. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval of the variances requested, except that the 0-75' hardcover increase caused by the proposed deck should _)e reduced or deleted if it cannot be shown that ':here are specific hardships or circumstances that justify granting of ..a variances. UaLe Fee _ 4 -[) - 9et±4 A Receipt,bv Initials o _ �w CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 1955 Fagerness Point Road, Wayzeta, MN 55391 Property Identification Number (P.I.D. 9' 1723140010 Please check one - Is the property xx abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPI.ICANT Phone ( home) 941 6303 Name Kar• 1 on Ggmplgr A r1zr; , Tyoss Phone (work) 372 62271 893 0260 Address: 9735 Dorset Lane City: Eden Prairie ,MN Zip: 55344 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) 471 7910 Name Ake Ronnkvist Phone (work) 544 4281 Address: 4484 West Arm Road City: Spring Park, MN Zip: Date Property Acquired April 1979 (month/year) do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District R-1 Present Use of Property 1',+ - ,r;t kE < I fit yet I a - Residential Other (specify) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 125,000 Describe request in netai 1 : `-E" «t tor7hc=(,i -------------------------------------------•--------------------------------- VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback Variances ( xx Front _�... 11 thei th iiardCOVE Fi 0c Rear) HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: see attaQjjD&j_____y_ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS ucscribe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: see attached ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Prcperty Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain th's list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt: renter. 34o-3271). 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the name., on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardco,,,r caicuiations as required. 5. Plat Map. - The Applicant and nroperty Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance ipplicati.on is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Departm n- that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's SignatuL Date A,PPLICANT'S SIGNATURE? 'he applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay al' fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and _ti.fies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature j� 1f r Date - OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges end agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by C-ty staff, consultants, agents, Commissic=n members-, and Council members for purposes of investiga- tion and verification of t},.is request. Owner's Sign.rtc,re ��. - ---- Date T Appl i cant must have al .l suhmitta 's into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Cormiiiss.ion Meetinq. Planninq Commission Mectinns are held on the third Monday of each -runt h. Appl icants mt,r;t be present at all scheduled revi.cw meetings _,i the Planning f-ommi ss.ion and Council, and, i f an applicant is unal o :Jtc r(. . !: hedulf'c3 meeting, to please make arrange- ments to have an I.her i --.E-d .;(lent attend in your plare and to advise the B11ildinq 6 ',,oni-t; Off ice of this c1h,imic• pr-ioy to tht: n,rcting. Details of Construction: d The current garage and shed are s-_uated too close to the lot line and street with today's building code. io remove these structures and build a "tuck under" adds immeasureably to the look of the property for ourselves and our neighbors. It also conforms to the safety requirement with no further need to back out of the garage onto the street. We are proposing a double width garage. It is also our plan tc, build a 1st level story on top of this "tuck under." On the lake side of the home, we are requesting a wood deck which will enable us to really utilize the lake views. This wood decking will allow for seepage thru the structure into a base. We do not intend to impede in any way the absorbtion (.)1 2r into the land. Our current building plan is for a second story on the south side of the home. Due to the fact that a portion of the current structure falls within the first zone, a request for variance is being requ,,iAed. Total cost figures will determine the final decision here. In granting our req-est, the overall hardcover on this property will be reduced by 185 square feet. This home will be our permanent residence. We are looking forward to our move and the enjoyment of Lake Minnetonka and the neighborhood. Your consideration of our request is appreciated. Sincerely, Karlton F. Gempler Maria S. Ives 1 \ v n �* I M T ] �� ��• j dp t 1, y Coffee S .� FPI OOy n 0 O A rd� /�. 1► Sh4� Un s t4M. t,i oajZ oV port ,D. kh, co , v - ALVFR R. FREEMAN ,-;OUNTY SURVEYOR HENNEPIN COUNTY ,MINK �Ut OAT[ 04/we7 SATCN 002 le 1e-117-21 1♦ ONe PPOP ADllw 61973 FAGEPNESS POINT PO Owly N?Mi A P dACKSTROM ETAL TA-PA/FV A P EACK,TPOM NJ '/AOOP 1973 FAGCWHESS PT PO MAIZATA MN SS341 Se 15-117-_3 14 0011 FYa AoOP 01951 CONCORDIA ST Ot.`C 4 NAAif SUSA" M BLrSE TAYPATEP SUS... !1 FUSSE mug /ADOP 3149, NORTH SHORE OP 11ATZATA Mi SS391 se 1e-117-23 1� M1• PPOP ADOP 0*949 FAGERW 33 POINT PO O6:;ZQ NAlE EVELYN A GOLOSTEIN IAXPAItP EVEL•N A f,OLOSTEIN K,U%E,'P--W 1149 FAu-PNESS POINT PO oP0►r. 'M 55391 NEWW FIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFOPMATION SYSTEM PPOPERTY O141ERS LIST 38 18-117-C3 14 0009 01965 F'.GEPNESS POINT RD G L EKLOF & C F LEE G;.K r EKLOF / CATCY LEE 1So5 FASERHESS PT RD WAYZATA 114 553'71 33 18-117-23 14 0012 01945 COI:COADIA ST R W RAGATZ & J I RAGATZ RICH�.PD W E JILL RAGATZ 5709 AYRSHIRE BLVD EDINA rN 55436 TOTAL CATCH 002 CC007 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 3 38 18-117-23 14 0010 01955 FAGS' '---SS POINT RD AKE E ROt:" A K E E RG} 44-E, W ARM Pi. SPRING PARK " ! 55384 38 16-117-23 14 0013 01935 CONCORDIA ST LYLE E CHRISTENSEN ETAL LYLE E CHRISTENSEN 1935 C: ~:('?DIA ST WAYZATA t^I 55391 I rt?TIFY THA, "IE FACTS REPRESEN-TED ARE AN ACCURATE 049 TRUE REPRESENTATIC r :FOPMATI(rN AS IT APPEARS THIS L•A'iE CN THE PECORDS OF THE HEM *)FP _ UNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAX:.TION. TO THE BEST OF MY KlniLL,G JID BELIEF. DATE BY y►_ Certificate of Survey 3r ,Carlton F. Gempler ,, Maria S. ' of Lot 9, Fagern.r s Hennepin County, :•,inrvesota Nordcover °'75Z-7c Aie- 5625! _,5,.F/ A,fiver 6G0 r s• .ri m h'oase- /60 ± s' Al. 75-?50 =onc area 84"x N-o��eo✓er 750' sq ri house IT/' • Doiro/ Ito ± .. s4eJ 444± - yorage 'aa± opron I050! cL/cam 4 yore. 475 i b/c{'o9sfnnc 5^ I T \C'p� h we t. b; k/ccd sfap '= I hereby certify that this is a tn.'_ correct representation Of a survey of the boundaries of i ;agerness, and of the location of all buildings, if ar, to show any other improvements o, 'n' J1 does not purport �chments. COFF '' & GRONBERG, INC. Mark S. Gronbern MN, Ii;2755 Gordon R. Coffi- �w j i ✓ s� apz�� IYO. 6064 Scale: 1 inch = 20 feet Engineers, land Surveyors, Date March 24, i987 Long Lake, Minnesota -e ;wed a-o-�- 0 Iron marker Cert.iticate of Survey for v-rlton F. Gempler and Maria S. Ives of Lot 9. Fagerness Hennepin County, Minnesota �P pC o^ u Hardcover co/cu/afions �`cca oi° yr 2 S d �4r� 5625 � sq Ff. Ilardco✓Cr 6401 f/ in houses /60 it in 5ifePS fWo Ik (. W htte-. ' �0 TS •950 Wow! sfsps'= ,i `'eo, Nar�orer 750:! sq.ff house ZI�- r?O;ip ry q 46 L OPirn 1051, b/oeteyylce:e<: a, �� at.�9 4515 1 3 1 Al- e r.r> F G•ARaGE �f `f Sf $ �3 P 20 NY IV �c A G 57ow a ate_ C- P �ad2 To 6E CJ��Er�c� i hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of Lot 9, Fagerness, and of the location of all buildings, if any, thereon. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. �G l ? ro 1zE �V,cE� COFFIN & GRONOERG, INC. TO E Q�c,FTf C� Mark S. Gronberg MN. Lic. No. 12755 Gordon R. Coffin MN. lic. No. 6064 Scale: 1 inch 20 feet Engineers, Land Surveyors, Planners ')ate March 24, 1987 r:vim a 9 a Long Lake, Minnesota 0 Iron marker b � NNri.aC.cwt& GR2 o 6, 'A017 To846 Coot e� 6 O Cl r . / • ` �N G� � c islin9 _y • ' E..ih• I 3 5/Yd• 0 / s. 0775' 9.ayE cnis , . a f A e and correct representation %i . tip• t 9. Eagerness, and of the r thereon. it does not purport neroachments. 02C-) 1 % To ze �Pprz v a a.C)9, TO — I SS N6r �{ARDCOvE� ,, 5 4 Scale: 1 inch = 20 feet late : March 24, 1487 raviNd 4 9-E7 0 : Iron marker LAKESHORE SETBACK Z,^Ni 0-75' 75-250' 250-500, 500-1000' Directions: ORCN, .,ARDCOVER CAL41AT ION' -WORKSHEET A. Existing B. E: i:� C. Existingposed E. Proposed D. Prophardcover lot area hardcovcr hardcover percentage percentage in zone: in zone ((R.A) x 1001 in zone [(D.A) x 100] 5le ;L5 s ` —eD r ` _ _�`� • �� ao sf Sf sf f s`_ �o 0 0 sf .; f 4 F. Allowed hardcover percentage 2-5 ^`^ A�n 35 A. Existing Lot Area in Zone - includes the total square footage of dry buildable land within the specified zone. B. Existing Hardcover in cone - includes the square footage of existing roofs, decks, sidewalks, driveways (v-ravel or paved) And other rain -impervious surfaces within the specified zone. C. Existing Hardcover Percentage - divide the number in B by the number in A and Multi pl..- by 100. 0. Proposed Hardcover in Zone - includes the existing hardcover plus all proposed additional hardcover. E. Proposed Hardcover Percentages - divide the number in D by the number in A and multiply by 10 F. Allowed Hardcover Percentages - if the percentages in column. E for any setback zone exceed the allowed percentages in column F, you should contact the Zoning Department at 473-7357 to discuss the possibilities of obtaining a variance. Generally, if a concurrent removal of existing hardcover match=t-,s the additional hardcover proposed, resulting in no net increase of hardcover in a specified zone, a variance may not be necessary. .HArdcover Review - 1955 Fagerness point Road Total Lot Area = 14,025 square feet = 0.32 acre 0 - 75' setback zone: Area - 5625 square feet i �- -75- ouse portion (i-" x 48.3) + (4.1 x 14.6) = 640 square feet Concrete steps (4.7 x 6) + (5.5 x 5.3) = 60 square feet Lakeshore stairs (2.5 x 301) Flagstone (2 x 12.5) 0 - 75 proposed hardcover: = 75 square feet = 25 square feet 800 square feet House -ortion 640 square feet Concrete steps (4.7 x 6) 30 square feet Lakeshore stairs 75 square feet Flagstone 25 square feet -- CEMOVE Deck 35' x 10' 350 square feet II- 20square feet = 19.9% 75' - 250' setback zone: area - 8400 squar( feet EiCISTING ?S�ZS�,: House portion (48.3 x 12) + (28.1 x 6) = 750 square feet Steps (5.1 x 5.2) + (5 x 5) = 51 square feet Concrete patio (17 x 13) = 221 square feet Shed (10.6 x 10.8) = 114 square feet Detached garage (22.1 x 20.1) = 444 square feet Concrete garage ap•-on (22 x 2) = 44 square feet Blacktop & gravel (22 x 16.5) + (23 x 30) =- 1050 square feet Flagstone walks (2 x 68) + (3 x 23) + (3 x 59) + (3 x 21) + Q x 25) = 495 square feet 3169 feet square or 37 . 7% Proposed 75 - 250' hardcover House portion Addition - 1 Story w/tuckunder (22 x 41) Driveway (R x 35) + (Is x 1(y) + (17.5 x 20) + (II x Ir,.5) } (A x 12) + (R x 1/2) Patio (1 3 x 17) S iriew31 k = 750 square feet. = 682 square feet 1900 square feet as drlwn 221 square feet ,5 square feet 2`'2R �scju,:�r -feet or 32.5a N"t dect^Ise of 5.2`t. or 441 square fr—t in '75 - 251 Net incrpa- .:.. cif 5.7'� or 120 squart, fret in 0 - 75 Overall n-t dt-rroa e of I21 square feet on property t To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members Cic.y Administrator Bernhardson C tr b 1E1I�G � 6 MAY 2, u 1887 b k; 4 ORONO Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & 'Zoning Administrator April 15, 1987 #1.132 Douglas G. Bumgardner, 3800 Wayzata Boulevard - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-1B Pertinent Section of Zoning Ordinances - Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (H): it . . incidental alterations which do not extend or intensify the non -conforming use" Council Directives Per Resolution 1646 - a) Item 6 (C) of Conclusions, Order and Conditions - "this permit shall be reviewed and must be tranferred by the City Council upon change in ownership to any party other that. the Keller Trust, Vickie Wisegraver or Glenn Nellist and/or Lowell Schapei" b) Item 1 (B) of Conclusions, Order and Conditions - "retail sale of normal grocery items including food stuffs, bakery goods, dairy products, package m�:Lat, fish or poultry, candy, tobacco, sundries, cooking or cleaning supplies, paper products, pet food or bird seed, etc. Food shall, not be cooked on the premises or otherwise prepared or served for immediate consumption either on the premises or in the form of take -cut restaurant or delicatessen service. Exhibit E, a resolution approved on March 11, 1985 by the Orono Council - granted the former leasee/operators an amendment of the above referenced condition of Resolution 1.646 allowing a mini bake use and a delicatessen use. The delicatessen use was never expanded but the mini bake was installed and continues to he a popular resource. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit b - Plat Map Exhibit. C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Addendum Exhibit F. - Council Resolution Approved 3/11/85 Exhibit F Resolution 1377 Exhibit G - Council Minutes 3/11/85 Exhibit ii - Floor Plan - Application 893 Exhibit ' Stiff Sket--h of Floor Plan - Application 1.132 il Zoning File #1132 April 15, 1987 Page 2 of 3 Mr. Bumgardner plans to purchase and operate the market at 3800 Wayzata Boulevard. The subject property is located at the most western border of our current Highway 12 corridor study, an area designated for no change with no extension of municipal services. The property remains a legal non -conforming use (retail market in residential zone) subject to the conditions of operation and use level set forth in Resolutions 1377 and Resolution approved 3/11/85. The applicant has submitted an addendum listing "Immediate Changes" that he wishes to install. Items 1 through 10 appear routine - Item (4) completes a previous condition of approval - paving of parking lot on north side providing additional parking stalls. Item (6) & (7) must follow standards set forth in Code. Sign in excess of 12 s.f. needs special approval. As for the "Long Term Idea", Bumgardner notes Council. has already approved the deli use but not the proposed reconstruction. The "furra_e" or utiltiy room is reduced to a third of the area with the installation of the new heating system. The much smaller office area is relocated and replaced with a small storage room with the propose3 open area now to serve as expanded deli area (review Exhibits I & J), with an increase of retail area of approximately 90 s.f. or 91xl0'. In the previous application of Nellist and Schaper seeking the expansion in uses, the existing retail space was not increased but mr•rely involved a rearrangement of the retail floor. The former operators did move the mini bake area from the southwest corner of the retail as originally approved into the area defined as "work area one", an area not included as retail f Loor area but was approved in 1985 for ds.li use. A counter replaced a wall. - the area behind the counter still is termed a work area and not included in retail area. The pertinent questions for this current review is will the deli use and/or increase in retail floor area of approximately 90 s.f. be considered an intensification of a non -conforming use. As in 1985, staff reports no violation of the conditions for operation of this market.. At planned or informal visits to the market, staff has never noted parking problems nor a lack of suitable parking area. The neighbors are in full support of the operation of the market. The City has received no complaints from the public who use the market. Options or Alternatives of Planning Commission Action: A) Deny request for deli use and reconstruct_ ion, but approve a conditional use permit for the new owner/operator transferring use permit :t operat.onal level of existinq market use findinq the proposal an expansion or int:enr;ification of the non-cor,forminct use and direct staff to prepare the necessary findings for Council review and action. . Zoning File #1132 April 15, 1987 Page 3 of 3 F) Approve the deli use in addition to transferring the permit to new owner/operator with the condition that there will be no expansion of retail fluor area and that deli use is to ha incorporated with mini bake operation within Work Area 1 finding the reconstruction resulting in an increase in retail f loor area and an expansion or intensification of the r,on-conforming use, and, once again, direct staff to draft the appropriate findings for Council review and action. C) Approve the deli ?se and reconstruction resulting in an increased retail. floor area of appi )ximately 90 s.f. with the transfer of the permit to the new owner/operator, once again, directing staff to draft the appropriate findings. Please provide the applicant an opportunity to amend the current proposal if one of the above items requested is not approved. The following are conditions that should be applied to the appropriate actions cited above: 1. The applicant must. apply for a license from the Hennepin County Community Health Department for the delicatessen use. 2. Foods shall not be served for immediate consumption either on the premises or in the form of take-out restaurant. Additional Comments and Planning Commission Recommendation - May 20, 1987 Review the enclosed Planning Commission minute of April 20, 1987, members voted unanimous approval of the renewal portion of the application to permit. an expanded deli use within work Area 1 (refer to Exhit t I) and a 90 s.f. expansion of commercial floor area. The applic nt also proposes relocating existing office area 1,9'x6'=54 s.f.) to work Area 2 (7'x7'=49 s.f.), refer to Exhibit I. The applicant advises the present lo.^ation of the office provides no privacy for the clerical operation of the business and is immediately adjacent to the main entrance. The exchange of office areas involves alterations within designated storage or work. areas. The increase of 90 s.f. of commercial floor area will not require an expansion of the 15 stall parking lot. Applicant does plan to pave the area to the rear or north of" the facility to improve leading area and provide employee parking stalls. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the directives of the Planning Commission recommendation and findings and conditions set forth in past resolutions that established quiclelines and limitations for the operation of the legal non -conforming use. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER [MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 5 (H) AND RESOLUTION NO. 1646 FILE #1132 WHEREAS, Douglas G. Bumgardner (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner and future iperator of the property located at 3800 Wayzata Boulevard within the City, of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Those parts cf Lots 11, 12, and 13, "MINNETONKA GARDEN ACRES", according to the recorded plat thereof, lying southerly of the centerline of. Hennepin County State Aid Highway No. 6 Plat 5, as deliniated in Book 70, Page 3844152 of Hennepin County records. Also the north �- of adjoining old County Road No. 6 now vacated (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the "incidental alteration" of the exiting structure that contains a legal non -conforming use by permitting an increase of 90 s.f. of commercial floor area, a delicatessen use within the counter area defined as Area 1 per attached f loor plan diar,ram and to relocate an office area of approximately 49 s.f. within a non-commercial floor area per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, subdivision 5 (H) and per Orono Resolution No. 1646 seeks approval of the tiansfer of 'he owner- ship of the property to ire applicant. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ^f Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed 3s Zoning File 01132. 2. The property is located in the PR-1B Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. On April 20, 1987, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as proposed and re:-ommended approval, teased on the following find.inys: A) The proposed alterations will pr,_,,.i,te i.mpr(-.,vCA circ,tlation and hotter access within sales z%rea. P) The 90 s.f. at incrF}asrcl rclaI f loor .-irea will not nr,Cvfsitatc ;et-, o,xt-><tnsion of t.,e parfAno f.ic-ilitlt~,, Pa,re . r.. , City Of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. C) Ths proposed alterations and expansion of food service .is not considered an intensification of the exi3ting non -conforming use. D) The City has received no negative comments from the surrounding property owners notified during the review of this application. E) The City never received complaints concerning the operation by the previous leasee under the restictive standards set forth in previc,t:, resolutions that govern the use of the property and will continue to govern the property. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comments of the applicant and the effE-:7t of the proposed use on the health, safel-y and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that granting a Conditional Use Permit to p..,:rmit the proposed alterations within the principal structure ai,d to approve the transfer of ownership to the applicant will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, Ohr3ER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Conditional 'se Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (H) and per the directives of Orono Resolution No. 1.377 that establishes' the original guidelines for the commercial use of this residentially zoned property to permit the propcsed alterations of the existing structure as described above and per Orono Resolution No. 1646 to approve the transfer of ownership of the property to the applicant, Donald G. Pumgardner, subject to the following conditions: 1. Per RFntiU 1 ut :can No. 1 3 77, the comme rc is 1 use authori zed by this condit-ional u-c peen:t �>hal1 consist of, and he Limited to, the followin(s: a) R, -t:ii 1 taut n()t who1c!;i+1cof farm produce, nuts, fruits, vegetab1#: , beddir.q plants, christmar trees, flowers and similar items ;rowr i.)n r,r off tt:is ptc-perty. CCa ty of ()R()NO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. b) Retail :;ale of normal. grocery items including foot stuffs, bakery goods, dairy products, package meats, fish or poultry, candy, tobacco, sundries, cooping or cleai.nq supplies, paper products, pet food or bird seed, etc. Food shall not be served for immediate consumption either on the premises or in the form of take-out restaurant. c) Retail off -sales of 3.2 beer subject to separate consideration of licensing provisions and requirements. d) Retail accessory sale of miscellaneous items including small crafts, pottery, food or cook books, garden supplies or small quantities of firewood provided such sales are accessory to the grocery or produce business. e) Commercial sales and storage shall be confined within the main building and 500 s.f. yard area designated as outdoor sales area. f) Outdoor sales of produce, plants, garden supplies or seasonal items such as pumpkins, christmas treeF, etc. shall be permitted provided such activities are confined tn an area of approximately 500 s.f. located east of the main bu:lding as indicated on Exhibit A. Outdoor display or sales may r.ot occur in the parking lot nor in the area referred to as "porch" area of the main building nor in the front yard setback a -ea nor in any highway right-of-way. g) Exterior storage of commercial stock, f4xtures or supplies shall not be permitted except within the designated outdoor sales area. h) The existing detached garage may conti:.ue to be used for inside commercial storage. i) Commercial signage for the entire property shall be limited to approximately 200 s.f. including any temporary or portable signs. This would not involve traffic directional signs. j) Produce may be grown on -situ fr,r sale on the premises. k) The maximum number of regular employees on the premises at. Any one time shall. i)ot exceed 4. 1) The commerci.31, retail bur'ries s may br- op(.°n to the public 7 days a wrrc-k; the hours of ol)(,r3t ior) sh.111 be between the hours of end City Of ()ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NG. m) 15 parking stalls shall. be available at all times to support the approved level. of commercial use. Designated parking stalls must be maintained so as not interfere with required build-'ng exit doors, service doors or . _-quired space for delivery trucks and/or trash containers. 2. The owner is hereby notified that. the City Council will not conside,. any future buildincr construction, additions ar expansion for commercial. uses because to do so would extend or intensify the non- conforming use contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code and contrary to the inLont of the Comprehensive Community Management Plan. This provision does not preclude normal building maintenance, repair or ncidental alterations necessary to continua the n(;n-conforming use within the existing structures as permitted by the terms of this resolution and Orono Resolution No. 1377. The owner agrees that he has no vested property rights to continue commercial use of the premises except in strict_ accordance with the terms and conditions of this resolution and Orono Resolution No. 1377, and that the City may impose adlitional conditions as may be needed in the future in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare. Applicant further agrees to waive any rights to object to such other conditions if after a complete and full hearing the City Council determines that such conditicn is necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare. 4. This conditional use permit for a non -conforming use shall run with the land and shall be Minding upon the property owners, applicants and tl -,ir heirs and assigns, except as follows: a) This permit shall be autnmati.call.y void for any violation of or non-compliance with the terms and conditions of Resolution No. 1377 and as amended in the term: and conditions stated herein. h) This 1.ermit shall be atically transferrable to a new or different le_asee/open.+tor F icled the property ownership remains unchanged. c) This permit sh2411 be resviewed and rust be transferred by the City! Council upon change in ownership. d) This pprrnit for non-confrmiriq spa I] be automatically void upon-'iscont inuancr. of c em-erci A use for a period of twelve menths I -.e.ct ion 10.031, Suhdiv <s:1nn t, (E) ), upon destruction by fire, flood or other calarrity !Soctir-n :O.O1, Subdivision 5 iD)j, or upon chan(le to a C'onfcrnlinit 'e' .I 14 'it 1;1 i 11SP l ',f'ctlon 10.03, sul�dlvlv'ion `' "(') ). Pat.jv 4 V (pity of (IRONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 5. This permit shall not serve to grant any pi .perty right other than a•- specifically provided and conditioned herein. 6. Any violation of or non-compliance with the terms of this permit or Resolution No. 1377 is and shall constitute a violation of the Orono Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 7. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not. with the owner, but are permissive only and must be exercised by applcationfor a buiding permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or the special. conditions (if this resolution will expire on that date (May 26, 1988). 8. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 2c,th clay of May, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hal in, City Clerk ___ Jame�RR. Grabek, Mayor^ Property Owners) oft { , G.tt-. C, C. ir CITY OF ORONO GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ' Lc" t Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)� Please check one - Is the property abstract or torrens? (for Conditional Use Applications only ,Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone ( home) Name �.. _ �!�' ,r' I' �.' 4 _ _ Phone (work) Address . C ,Air. R 8,11) City '.�� _ t Zip S 5 - than applicant) - -- -___ OWNER (if different Phone (home)�£.?�2, 91 QQ Name !,, �, �I S Phone FLU 1�� 41 -fl ,�.► ti,l r146 ..0 r� _ n Address C ty Zip Date Property AcgLired (month/year) I (do) ((do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. --..----------��---------------------------------------------------------- FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS $100.00 4) Residential accessory Use $1.50.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/Bldg '�2.50.00 f,) C(-,,mmei'rial/Indust ri.ai Use $200.00 f ) Lana ..! ; oration Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more reawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshorn E`F?L' 'i'IC? - c�e+� ft'c• �.c'hE��'.�; i_e_� O'i'P►?K APPLICATIONS $150.00 Commc-rcial Site Plan ReviE°w (+ consuitant fees) $250. tall Vacat l('.)n $l v,0. 00 Faseme,nt Vacation $ 50.00 Fasenlent :.,ub3i vi Sion $250.00 Nrzoninq $200. Co Appea 1 r __.__ other - secs fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of. Property Residential, C_c rr%, ,�y��Li_ Other. (spec:ify) : c_t,a,rY-+r` �,,;Re ------------------------ -------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST .. Describe request in detail:�.�L\ \ . '-aTC.r1 r i-��i ;j,%.c -------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITIALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Citified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hr nnepin County Department of Finance A-(03 Government Cernter 346-3271) tamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above List with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey. 5. Construction plan, if applicable. 6. Plat Map. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by 'honing Department that Land Use Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's siy,ialure r Date _ r? t. OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. owner's signature �_, Date ------------------------ ----------- Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning ^ommission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of tl,- Planning Commission and Council, and, if an applicant i unable attend a scheduled meeting, to please Rake arrangements to have ar ithorized agent attend in your place and to advise the building i 7oninq Office of this change prior to the meeting. V RUN DATE 03/10/87 BATCH 009 38 29-116-23 32 0006 PROP ADDR D'1,2-P NAME HENN COUNTY PK RESERVE DIST TAXPAYER HENN COUNTY PK RESERVE DIST NAME/ADDR 38 29-118-23 34 0006 PROP ADDR 03660 SIXTH AVE N 0WNER NA',IE PARK GUN CLUB INC TAXPAYER PARK GUN CLU3 NAME/ADDR C/O RUBY GESCHWIND 4939 VERA CRUZ AVE MPLS MN 55429 38 32-118-23 21 0003 PROP ADDR O',11ER N;a:E S A CIRSPINSKI ETAL TAXPAYER CLIFFORD L OTTEN ' NAME/ADDR 2265 W WAYZATA BLVD LONG LAKE MI 55356 3S 32-118-23 .'4 0004 PROP ADDR O EP NAME LISLE VICKERMAN JR ET AL TAXPAYER ORCHARD PARK FARM INC NAME/ADDR 39E0 WATERTOLN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION? SYSTEM PROPERTY OLINERS LIST 38 29-118-23 33 _.001 03960 SIXTH AVE N F J THtIMPSON ETAL GLENN CUMMIIGS 3960 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 29-118-23 34 0008 03740 WAYZATA BLVD S A CIRSPINSKI ETAL CLIFFORD L OTTEN 2265 W WAYZATA BLVD LGNNG LAKE hN 55356 38 32-118-23 22 0002 03325 SIXTH AVE N FRED HOLASEK JR ETAL FRED HOLASEK ,4 3325 6TH AVE N LGNG LAKE INN 55356 TOTAL BATCH 009 03010 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 19 38 29-118-23 33 0008 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RY BURLINGTON NC?THERN RY 38 29-118-23 34 0009 03800 WAYZATA BLVD MAYM4A V CIRSPINSKI MAYONA V CIRSPINASKI-SUNIDLIN 3907 JANET LANE BROOKLYN CENTER MN 55429 38 32-118-23 22 0003 03825 SIXTH AVE N FRED HOLASEK JR ETAL FRED HOLASEK JR 3825 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPPFSENTATICH OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF TH: HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF NAY KNUNLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE , BY '' ✓ D BUMGARDNEWS ASPHALT MAINTENANCE CO. 17301 RIDGEVIEW DRIVE 0 MINNETONKA, MN 55343 ■ 612/ 475-0459 �_. '(vNrr)Ci-)i tA_I. - ►� �f11 {1 T U 7- S I l�rt_ .- L 1 1 1'L 2) �►=� ► .t i ,'� t t� 4 lJ L' i 1 Its J~ E� ; �� t1 ` r1 CiT tM Lot, Pe— - Q_ Y; S� _ �`�_ arm �'ST ►C� _ c�l= }`:{1d;� C r l GL r\ G� mc 1 V he..FCXkINt PIC i `r_-�1C_ �_ f1, ni) tJtJ►'u� .K� 1 tt L. �. .�. cc- t1 . ct ~ )C.. f:: { f'1 { C. l `r 0 l , \; ` t 1,.� {.. L .l`} ( ��(. /1CZ F� r,'�l;s1' r ii461 FREE ESTIMATES 0 SEALCOATING SPECIALISTS • PATCHING • SWEEPING BUMGARDNER"S ASPHALT MAINTENANCE CO. 17301 RIDGEVIEW DRIVE ■ MINNETONKA, MN 55343 ■ 612/ 475-0459 FREE ESTIMATES ■ SEALCOATING SPECIALISTS ■ PATCHING ■ S'*/EEPING A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAT USE PERMIT FOR LOWELL SCHAPER AND GLENN NELLIST 7,P1-ROVING AN AMENDMENT OF CONDITIONAI, USE PERMIT RESOLUTION 1646 ALLOWING NEW RETAIL USES WITHIN EXISTING RETAIL AREA OF MARKET FILE 893 WHEREAS, Lowell Schaper and Glenn Nellist (hereinafter the applicants) have an interest in a property owned by Vicki Wisegarver. (hereinafter owner) located at 3800 Wayzata Boulevard within the City of Orono (Hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Those parts of Lots 11, 12, and 13, "MINNETONKA GARDEN ACRES", according to the recorded plat thereof, lying southerly of the centerline of Hennepin County State Aid Highway No. 6 Plat 5, as deliniated in Book 70, Page 3844152 of Hennepin Count;- records. Also the north 1/2 of adjoining old County Road No. 6 now vacated (herein- after the property); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a Conditional. Use Permit per. Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (H) and to amend Resolution 1646 Item 1 (B) of the Conclussions, Order and Conditions section of that resolution to permit a mini bake, limited delicatessen service and one picnic table to be placed within 20'x25' designated outdoor sales area at the east side of market. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Orono, F[NDINGS 1. The application was reviewed as Zoning File No. 893. 2. The property is located in the RR-lB, Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. The applicants have applied for a Conditional Usr^ Permit to permit a mini bake, providing for on -site baking of prepared doughy, within the existing retail area of the market, a limited delicatessen service providing delivery or pick-up service of tray foods prepared in kitchen ar.d sold within retail are of market and one picnic table placed within designated outdoor sales area at east side of market to serve retail customers. Pagv 1 of 5 4. On June 11., 1984, Council app,oved Resolution 1646 granting a Conditional Use Permit to the applicants, sec- tionp of that resolution set forth limitations on the retail uses (,f the market, a large non -conforming use, the appli- cants see,- ,mendment of the following section of that resolution: Item 1 (B) of the Conclusions, Order and Conditions b) Retp,l sale of normal grocery items including food stuffs, bakery goods, dairy products, package meats, fish or poultry, candy, tobacco, sundries, cooking or cleaning supplies, paper products, pet food or bird seed, etc. Food shall not be cooked on the premises or otherwise prepared or served for immediate consumption either on the -remises or in the form of take-out restaurant or delicatessen service. 5. The applicants also seek confirmation per Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (H) " incidential alterations which do not extend or intensify the non -conforming use" that the uses proposed above will not intensify or extend the current market operation. 6. On February 19, 1985, the Orono Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend apprc val of a Condit-4onal Use Permit for the applicants based on ::ne or more of the following findings: A. The new uses will not involve permanent structural changes or additions to existing structure. B. The new uses will not involve expansion of the retail area. C. The new uses will not encourage customers to consume food on the premises as with a restaurant use. D. The new uses appear consistent with the original intent and scope of the market es set forth in Resolution 1646. F. The applicants have not violated a condition of Resolution 1646. F. At the current level of operation, there is adequate parkinq area. The new uses will not create additional parking demands. Page 2 of 5 G. The new uses will result in the elimination or cutting down in one t:)hase of retail. and replacement with a new retail use. H. The City has never received a complaint from resi- dents on the operation of the market by the applicants. 7. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the aplicant and the effect of the additional retail uses in the overall operation of the market as proposed on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 8. The City Council finds that granting a Conditional Use Permit to permit the addition of the new retail uses as proposed will not be detrimental to the health, safety or goner.al welfare of the public, would not adversely affect 'raffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and the location and proposed use of the residential property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the zoning code and comprehensive plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit per Secti 10.03 Subdivision 5 (H) and Orono Resolutions 1377 and 1646 t. Lowell Schaper and Glenn Nel.list to permit the addition of new retail uses as specified above at the Summerfield Farms market located at 3800 Wayzata Boulevard subject to the following conditions: 1. All equipment- installed to support the mini bake operation is subject to the standards of the Uniform Building Code and Fire Code. 2. Prior to install.inq the delicatessen use, the applicants must obtain a license from the Hennepin County Community Health Department for the. food preparation operation. . All foods consumed at informal nil'-.;oor picnic area must be purchased at retail from within market. 4. Foods sha 1 l not thr, Fzerv(,d fnr i -T,mf,di at consumption ,i ther on the prf,rni sl,s ()r i r, t ►„c fora of take-out restaurant . I',.i, i, � 3 o `r ra 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. The undersigned owner and parties with an interest in the property have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the City Council on this llth day of March, 1985. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Mary C. Butler, Mayur (1) Property Owner P City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR VICKI WISEGARVER AND TOM BROKL AUTHORIZING CONTINUED NON -CONFORMING USE OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AT 3800 WAYZATA BLVD FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES AS LIMITED HEREIN WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal. corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Mi..,iesota; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State Statutes 412 et. seq. and 462 et. seq. the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted zoning regulations for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the subject of this resolution is certain res- identially -zoned property located at 3800 Wayzata Blvd in the City of Orono, hereinafter referred to as the "Wisegarver Property", which is legally described as follows: 1. "Those parts of Lots 11, 12 and 13, "MINNETONKA GARDEN ACRES", according to the recorded plat thereof, lying southerly of the centerline of Iennepin County State Aid Highway No. 6, Plat 5, as deliniated in Book 70, Page 3844152 of Hennepin County records. Also the north 1/2 of adjoining old County Road No. 6 now vacated." 2. Thu above described property is divided into three tax parcels identified as follows: a) PIN 29-118-23 34 0002 b) PIN 29-118-23 34 0005 c) PIN 29-118-23 33 0006; and WHEREAS, use of the Wisegarver Property has been the subject of previous City Council actions including: 1. A nor -conforming use conditional use permit issued to then owner-oc(7upant Mayona Sundlin on September 13, 1968, for: a) "Non -Conforming Use Permit for Fruit i Vegetable Stand." b) "One building for vegetables and groceries plus living quarters. Approximately 40' X 501. One acre for building anti parking. Cold Storage Building." llaq • 1 of l ) City of ORONO J RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.Z--- 2. Resolution No. 1239 Finding Facts and Denying the Variance and Conditional Use Permit Applications by Orton and Vicki Wisegarver adopted January 12, 1981. 3. Resolutic~i No. 1271 Regarding the Status of Property known as Kellers Market, 3800 Wayzata Blvd adopted May 11, 1981; and WHEREAS, the Wisegarver property was the subject of a temporary restraining order .issued by Hennepin County District Judge Lindsay G. Arthur on April 9, 1981, which order enjoined Orton and Vicki Wisegarver individually and doing business as Kellers Market from operating any business or permittinq any habitation or use of the premises until further Order of. the Court or until various building code and fi,-e code violations as noted therein were corrected to the satisfaction of the City: and WHEREAS, on or befor April 8, 1981, the Kellers Market business has been closed to the public and all non -conforming commercial use of the property was discontinued; and WHEREAS, on December 1, 1981, Vicki Wisegarver and Tom Brokl the proposed lessee of the Wisegarver Property, hEreinafter referred to as "The Applicants", have applied for a new non -conforming use conditional use permit to allow correction of the various building and fire cods: violations and to allow reopening of a limited comm�r.:.ial_ non -conforming u: -, on the . segarver property; and WHEPEAS, t1he City Council has reviewed this new application, the recommendations of staff and the 1tanning Commission and written and oral collulientz of thr applicants. NOW, THEREFORE BF IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby makes t.ie following Findings of Fact: 1. The Wisegarver property is ♦-cated in the RR-113 One Family Rural Residential Zoning District, which district includes the following performance standards (34.842): Minimum Lot Area: 2 acres - 87,120 sf Minimum. Lot Width: 200 feet Minimum Trent Yard, Rear Yard or Side Yard Adjacent to Street: `,0' Minimum Interior Side Yard: 30' 1"t'ic _ (,f 1 City of OR,ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.-1-- - 2. The Wisogarvcr property, including all three tax parcels, contains 71,482 sf or 1.641 acres according to a certificate of survey by Gary Gabriel dated nnril 19, 1980, as revised February 25, 1982. 3. The Wisegarver property contains the following structures or improvements as shown on the Gabriel survey: a) One 49.0 ft X 60.0 ft concrete block main building plus a 5.0 ft wide open awning or canopy over a concrete slab on the southwest or front side. This building previously housed the Kellers Market commercial use referrenced in Resolution No. 1239, and prior to that it contained the Sundlin (later Cirspinski) residence and 1-2-l1i Market referrenced in Resolution No. 12 9 and in the September, 1968 conditional use permit. This building is setback 14.2 ft from the Wayzata Blvd highway right-of-way, and the awning or canopy extends 5 ft closer to within 9 ft of the right-of-way. b) One 24 ft X 26 ft detached residential garage converted to commercial storage purposes, referrenced as the "cold storage buildinc" in the September 1963 Conditional Use rerm.it. c) One smi-ill storage stied or root cellar built int,, the hillsi.dc, (,ast c;f the main huildin(1. d) One 16 ft X 40 ft wood framed "greenhouse" no longer in use. e) Asphalt paved parking lot around the south, west and :forth sides of the main buildinq with paved driveway accesses one each to Wda '7ata Rlvd and to County Road 6. 4. The Wise: /er property is owned in fee by Mayon& Cirspinski (nee Sun -.—xi) as contract for deed vendor to Keller Trust, contract vends.- and Trustee for Vicki Wisegarver's five minor children. Applicant Vicki Wisegarver has the power to act en t uh.i : f cif the Keller Trust. S. Orton Wisefiar-t r, the principal applicant and subject of Resolution No. 1239, no lender has any interest in the Nist iarvt i j,toperty .,r in the current application. P $qt- 3 of I,, "? City of ORONO .r! RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL t ns �t 1 _ NO. 6. Applicant Tom Brokl intends to lease the Wisegarver property from the Keller Trust and then to operate the business and property as l:chowind's Country Store. 7. The findings of fact contained in Resolution No. 1239 are hereby reaffirmed and made a part of this application and this resolution as if fully set out herein. Some of the more pertinent findings are restated as follows: a) Mayona Cirspinski lived in and used approximately one half of the main Luilding as her residence until September 9, 1977, when all residential use of the premi-•was terminated upon plurchase of the property by Orton and _ ..i Wisegarver. b) Sometime after September 9, 1977, Orton Wisegarver made several structural changes in the main structure by removing the conforming residential apartment and thereafter increasing the non conforming commercial use. c) These structural and use changes were made without obtaining ):suilding permits without obtaining the required conditional use permit and approval by the City, and in violation of zoning code provisions prohibiting changes in or _xpansion of non -conforming) uses. d) Outdoor sales 1-_nd storage activities increased dramatically and resulted in unperm.itted commercial use cf required yard .end sr�tback areas, and otherwise created distractions for r�,otorists trying to negotiate the the Highway 12 County Road 6 intersection. e; Reconstructic,n of the highway intersection by the State Department of Transportation in 1980 resulted in a quick -take condemnation of a portion of the original Wisegarver property as shown on the February 25, 1982, Gabriel survey, and further resulted in severing of a portion of the on -site sewage treatment drainfield causing surfacing of untreaf-ed effluent an.l failure of the septic system. f) The existing driveway entrance on i Highway 12 was fudged to be a saft-ty hazard and recommended for closure by thief of Police Mel Kilbo and Public Works Coordinator John Gerhardson for the fallowing reasons: 1. lack of sight distance to the east 2. cunflictin(j intviriection movements Caqu 4 of 15 City of OR,ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 1...p j yl 3. lack of deceleration lane to Kellers driveway 4. existing driveway location al.l-ws unsafe movements across Highway 12 to/from F, )und County Road 6 5. discourage "impulse" decisi....- where through trave Lers suddenly stop and turn without adequate warning 6. dramatic increase in frequency of accidents at the Highway 12 - County Road 6 intersection in last year's time 1. existing entrance is too close to intersection 8. 55 mph speed limit is too fast to encourage turning movements 9. pedestrian traffic is attracted by outdoor displays adding to potential conflicts and hazards 8. Resolution No. 1239 concluded by finding that the Kellers Market use as existing on the Wisegarver property at that time constituted a violation of the. Orono Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan, and that the: requested conditional use permit was denied until such time as the various physical problems anu building code violations were corrected, and the property use returned to a level consistent with thf_: original conditional use permit issued in 1968. 9. After adoption of Resolution No. 1239, Orton Wisegarver kept the Kellers Market business operating and open to the public with little or no attempt to correct the violations or problems noted in that resolution. 10. In March of 1981, routine building and fire prevention inspections revealed a long list of building code and fire code violations which were judged to be direct safety hazards to the public. Correction orders were issued to Orton Wiseqarver on March 11, 1981. Failure to correc these violations -nd failure to answer subsequent citatio: resulted in the ity seeking a temporary restraining order requiring closu a of the business to the public until the itemized safety hazards were corrected. 11. On April 9, 1981 , Hennepin County District Judge Lindsay G. Paqv , of 1 " City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Arthur issued a temporary restraining order enjoining Orton and Vicki Wisegarver individually and doing business as Kellers Market from operating any business or permitting any habitation or use of the premises until further Order of the Court or until the various building code and fire code violations as noted therein were corrected to the satisifaction of the City. 12. Following issuance of the Temporary Restraining Order, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1271 to clarify the status or the property. The findings of fact and conclusions of Resolution No. 1271 are hereby reaffirmed and made a part of this application and resolution as if fully set out herein. Some of the more pertinent findings and conclusions are restated as follows: a) ".......the property and business known as Kellers Market is closed to the public and shall remain closed for any business use until such time that the use and premises are in full compliance with all Building, Zoning, and Fire Code regulations of the City. Any occupancy, construction, alteration or business use of the building or premises without prior written approval and authority from the City Council shall be deemed to be a violation of the non -conforming use provisions of Section 31.100 of The Orono 7uninq Code." b) "issuance of new permits as required for any constriction or alteration work on these premises shall be subject to prior approval of a conditional use permit by the City Council." c) "No business shall reopen and no business activity shall occur on the property unless the City Council first shall issue a Conditional Use Permit for continuation of a non -conforming commercial use in the RR-lB single family residential zone pursuant to Section 31.100 of the municipal code." 1) The new application and intended use shall be con- sistent with the di 2ctions contained in Resolution 1239 and with the provisions of the original nonconforming use conditional use permit issued to Mayona sundlin nn Septf,mber 13, 196P. rage 6 of 15 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL c, NO. -7 e) Approval of any such conditional use permit shall be conditioned upon abatement of all outstanding building, zoning and fire code violations prior to reopening of the building or premises to the public. 13. This current Conditional Use Permit application by Vicki Wisegarver and Tom Brokl was made with full knowledge of the existence and contents of Resolution #1239 and Resolution 1271 and Judge Arthur's temporary restraining order. The current application is made with the intent of resolving all the violations noted in said documents and of complying with all requirements of the City so as to reopen a limited commercial produce and grocery market consistent with the 1968 non -conforming use conditional use permit issued to Mayona Sundlin. 14. A review of the current application by the Hennepin County Department of Transportation has resulted in a recommendation to eliminate the existing driveway access onto County Road 6 and to serve the entire site with one new access onto County Road 6 located approximately 50ft. east of the existing de- tached garage as shown on Exhibit A. 15. A septic site evaluation report has been submitted to the City and approved by Michael Gaffron, City On -Site Manager. This report calls for an entirely new mound -type draintield to be installed on the hill east of the garage structure, citing the.- area of the existinq failing on -site system as unsuitable for continued use as a drainfield area. 16. Vicki Wisegarver and Tom Brokl have agreed to obtain required permits and to do the physical repairs and improvements cited in the temporary restraining order and as the March 11, 1981, City Correction Order, including but not limited to: a) Correcting fire code violations b) Repairing or replacing structural work so as to correct building, plumbinq and mechanical code violations c) Installing a new conforming on -site sewage treatment system. 17. Vicki Wisegarver and Tom Brokl have agreed to reinstall livinq quarters within the main building which quarters P,Ige 7 of 15 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. will be occuppied as the primary residence of an individual involved in the operation of the business on a daily basis. This installation will return conforming residential use to the premises in accord with the 1968 conditional use permit. 18. Vicki Wisegarver and Tom Brokl have agreed to revise the parking area and driveway accesses to remove and eliminate all vehicle access to Highway 12 and to remove and relocate the access on County Road 6 from the existing location to the new location as approved by Hennepin County Depart- ment of Transportation. 19. This current application, its intent, its review, and the promises of the applicants satisfy the orders and direction contained in Resolutions No. 1239 and 1271. THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that based upon the above findings of Fact, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby grants a non -conforming use conditional use permit to the Keller Trust and Vicki Wisegarver subject to the following conditions and limitations: 1. This Conditional Use Permit shall be issued pursuant to Section 31.100 et. se(,. relating to continuation of existing non -conforming uses, but prohibiting expansion of non- conforming uses, and preventing changes in use except to conforming user. 2. This Conditional Use Permit shall authorize limited com- mercial use of the Wisegarver property as an accessory use to the permitted residential use of that property. If residential use of the Wisegarver property should cease in the future, then the non -conforming commercial use shall also cease. 3. The commercial use authorized by this Conditional Use Permit shall consist of, and be limited to, the following: a) Retail but not wholesale sale of farm produce, nits, fruits, vegetables, bedding plants, christmas trees, flowers and similar items grown on or off this property. b) Retail sale of normal grocery items including food stuffs, bakery goods, dairy products, packaged meats, fish Page 8 of 15 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ! NO. l37? or poultry, candy, tobacco, sundries, cooking or cleaning supplies, paper products, pet food or bird seed, etc. Food shall not be cooked on the premises or otherwise prepared or served for immediate consumption either on the premises or in the form of take-out restaurant or delicatessen service. c) Retail off -sale of 3.2 beer subject to separate con- sideration of licensing provisions and requirements. d) Retail accessory sale of miscellaneous items including small crafts, pottery, food or cook books, garden supplies or small quantities of firewood provided such sales are accessory to the grocery or produce business. e) Commercial sales and storage shall be confined within the main building except as specificially permitted herein. f) Outdoor sales of produce, plants, garden supplies or seasonal items such as pumkins, christmas trees, etc. shall be permitted provided such activities are confined to an area of approximately 500 square feet located east of the main building as indicated on Exhibit A. Outdoor display or sales may not occur in the parking lot nor in the "porch" arca of the main building nor in the front yard setback ar a nor in any highway right-of-way. cg) Exteri.or storage of commercial stock, fixtures or supplies shall not be permitted except within the designated outdoor sales area. h) The existing detached garage may continue to be used for inside commercial storage, or may be reconverted to a garage at the applicants discretion. i) Commercial siqnage for the entire property shall be limited to approximately 100 square feet including any temporary of portable sirens. 7) Produce may be grown on -site for sale on the premises. k) The maximum number of regular employees on the premises at any one time shell not exceed 4, which number shall include the resident-employ-e. P,1414. O of 1', f City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL i NO.1377 -- r. t . 1) The commercial/retail business may be open to the public 7 days a week but the hour of operation shall be limited to between the hours of 7:90 A.M. and 9:00 P.M. m) At least 14 parking stalls each at least 9' X 20' in size shall be available at L11 times to support the approved level of commercial use (160C sq ft interior retail + 500 sq ft exterior retail - 2110 sq ft : 1 space/150 sq ft), plus at least 1 parking stall maintained for the private use of the required residence. Designated parking stalls shall not be located so as to interfere with required building exit doors, service doors or required space for delivery trucks and/or trash containers. 15 spaces are indicated on Exhibit A. 4. The residential use required by this Conditional Use Permit shall consist of at least the following minimum requirements: a) 600 square feet of the main building devoted to a re- sidential apartment including bedroom, bathroom and living area. The residential toilet may also be used for the required commercial toilet if it conforms with building code requirements for public use. b) independent access to r:he residential unit separate from any access thru the- commercial area. c) At least 1 residential harking space as noted above. 5. The required residential apartment shall he occuppied as the primary residence of an individual employee, manaqer or owner who is involved in the operation of the business on a daily basis. 6. The main building shall be used for both the required residential use and the authorized limited non-conforminq commercial use. Of the total 2940 square feet building, at least oOO >q ft shall be devoted to the residential use and n(l :-iore than 1600 square feet shall be devoted to interior retail sales area (including the semi -enclosed south side veranda but excluding the 5 It open "porch"). The remaininq areas may be circulation space and commercial storaqe, office or preparation areas. No reduction in the required residential area shall b� permitted. No ex- pansion of the commercial retail arra shall be permitted. Page 10 of 1`� City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL I NO. / 3 7 7 _---- Any such commercial expansion would constitute a violation of the terms of this Conditional Use Permit and would be a violation of Zoning Code Section 31.108. 7. Prior to reopening of the business to the public, the applicants or their contractors shall obtain all required permits and shall abate and correct all fire code violations and all building code violations as rioted in Judge Arthur's April 9, 1981, Temporary Restraining Order and in the City's March 11, 1981, Official Correction Orders. Correction of these items will be verified by the City Building In- spector according to State Code standards and requirements. 8, Because of the time of year, the City will authorize strictly temporary use of the existing septic tanks as sealed holding tanks which shall be regularly pumped to remove all effluent from the premises provided that as a condition of this permit the applicant's hereby agree to install a new mound -type on -site drainfield and associated pumping system in accordance with the design prepared by Hankanson Anderson Associates dated December 4, 1981, as reviewed and approved by Michael Gaffron in a report dated January 29, 1982, which work shall be completed and in use not latter than June 15, 1982. The new on -site system shall be subject to all normal permits and inspections Pursuant to Ordinance #210. 9. Upon completion of the corrective work noted in item #7 above, but not necessiar.ily prior to completion of the new septic system noted in item #8 above, the City Attorney will advise Judge Arthur that the City's requirements have been satisfied and that the April 9, 1981, Temporary Restraining Order should be released. 10. Prior to reopening of the business to the public the applicant's hereby aciree to complete the County forms necessary to legally combine the three separate tax parcels of the Wisegarver property into one parcel for tax and zoning purpose~. 11. The applicants herchy agree to remove the existing wood frame greenhouse from the Wiseciarver property not later than June 15, 19R2. 12. A specific nd vital condition of this permit is that all 11,14-1 c 1 1 c,f 1 " City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ 1177 _ _- vehicular access to the Wisegarver property be from County Road No. 6, that no vehicular access be permitted from Wayzata Blvd, Highway 12, and that all access to County Road 6 meet the location and design approval of Hennepin County Department of Transportation. The applicants hereby agree to obtain a new access permit from Hennepin County, and any work permit that may be required from the Minnesota Department of Transportation, which permits will authorize the following: a) Complete removal of the existing driveway access to Highway 12 including reconstruction of the ditch line removing all traces of the existing fill. b) Similar removal, if required by Hennepin County, of the existing d veway access to County Road 6. c) Construction of a new driveway access to County Road 6 according to the requirements of Hennepin County Depart- ment of Transportation. d) Restoration of all. disturbed areas with sod or seed. Further the applicants hereby agree to physically block - off and prevent use of the existing driveway access to Highway 12 prior to reopening of the business to the public, and to physically complete all of the required access re- movals and changes prior to June 15, 1982. 13. The applicants are hereby notified that the City Council will not consider any future building construction, addition or expanEion for commercial purposes because to do so would extend or intensify the non -conforming use contrary to the intent of Zoning Code Section 31.108 and contrary tt, the intent of the Comprehensive Community Management Plan. This provision does not preclude normal building maintenance, repairs or incidental alteration necessary to continue the non-conforminq use within the existing structures as permitted by the terms of this resolution. 14. Resolution No. 1271 noted for the record that April 8, 1982, was the 12 month deadline date for reopening of some form o� .:ommercial business on the Wisegarver property in order to preserve non-conforminq use rights pursuant to Zoning Code Section 31.105. Because of the• goo(i-faith efforts Page 12 of 15 Cif.,,,- of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. -__-- of this application, the City Co-ancil hereby extends the deadline for reopening of the business to not later than June 15, 1982. 15. The applicants hereby agree that they have no vested property rights to continue commercial use of the premises except in strict accordance with the terms and conditions of this resolution, and that the City may impose additional conditions as may be needed in the future in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare. Applicants furthar agree to waive any rights to object to such other conditions if after a complete and full hearing the City Council determines that such condition is necessary to protect the public, health, safety, and welfare. 16. Based upon the findings of fact in this case, including the findings of Resolution No. 1239 and No. 1271, the City Council hereby declares that they would have denied this current application except for the promises made by the applicants that they would strictly adhere to the ,conditions and limitations set forth herein, and furtler ttiq Council declares that this application and conditional use permit shall be denied and will. be considered to be invalid unless all the terms and conditions of this resolution are complied with. This declaration is made for one r more of the following reasons: ..? Any other commercial use or m y increased or expanded commercial use would not be cons.stent with the prior existing non -conforming use as documented in the 1969 conditional use permit for Mayona Sundlin, and therefore such use would constitute a "use" variance as prohibited by Minnesota Statutes 462.357 Subd. 6 (1). b) Removal or elimination of the prior existing residential ✓ occupancy would likewise constitute a prohibitei "use" variance. c) Failure to correct the listed building code and fire code violations would be r direct health and safety hazard to the public. d) Failure to correct the failing septic system would constitute a direct pollution and health hazard to the public. i'agv 1 3 of I ') City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1377 -- e) Failure to revise the vehicular access points and/or indescriminate expansion of outdoor sales activities would distract drivers and constitute a public safety hazard for all persons travelling through the busy Highway 12- County Road G intersection. 17. This Conditional Use Permit shall become effective upon adoption by the City Council and upon agreement and signature by the applicant Vicki Wisegarver and by the intended lessee Tom b-okl. This permit shall be automatically void if not signed by the applicants prior to June 15, 1982. 18. This Non -Conforming Use Conditional Use Permit shall run with the land and shall be binding upon t:-ie property owners, applicants and their heirs and assigns, except as follows: a) This permit shall be automatically void for any violat or. of or non-compliance with the terris and conditions of this permit. b) This permit shall be automatically reviewed and the terms and conditions reconsidered by the City Council on or about April 1, 1983, at which time such reconi=idercation may be required annually thereafter. c) This permit shall. be automatically transferrable to a new or different lessee/operator provided the property ownership remains unchanged and provided that prior to such lessee change the new lessee agrees in writing to the terms and conditions contained herein, which agreement shall be indic -ed by signature on the original copy of this Resolution as kept of record by the Orono City Clerk. d) This permit shall be reviewed and must be transferred by the City Council upon change in ownership to any party other than the Keller Trust, Vicki Wisegarver, o- Tom Brokl. e) This permit for non -conforming us.- shall be automatically void upon discontinuance of commercial use for a period of twelve months (Sec. 31.105), upon destruction by fire, flood or ether calemity (Sec. 21.104) or upon change to a conforming reside..tial usc• (Sec. 31.103). 19. This permit shall n()t serve tc (grant any property riqht ether than as spvt-if►cal1�,• r,r-vid-d and eenditioned herein. 1'an, 14 ' 1 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. -�-- 20. Any violation of or non-compliance with the terms and conditions of this Conditional Use Permit and/or Variance Resolution are and shall constitute a violation of the Orono Zoning Code which shall be punishable as a misdemeanor as provided therein. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this ,,2 day of &4Ae.4.,, 1982. ATTEST: r, ZZ,'i:�, 41, J, -,�j b1_11r " Alberta M. Strom, City Clerk William B."Van Nest, Mayor Mary C. Butler, Acting Mayor We the owners and applicants have read ana understood the above Conditional Use Permit and/or Variance k(_s.olution; we agree on behalf cf ourselves, oir seccessors and assigns that the use of the above described property may be so regulated by the City of Orono; we agree to the terms and conditions of this permit as specified herein; we agree that any violation of or non-compliance with the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Orono Zoning Code; and 4:e agree to the filing f. a copy of this re- solution in the chain of title to the xoperty STATE OF MINNESOTA i 'Vicki Wisegarver app scant and ) ss. Att)rney in Fact _or the Keller COUNTY OF HEI;NEPTN ) irrevor_ablo Minor's Support Trust The f orega i n!q in ,t_rume. s lcknowledged before me this L day f. tP�oI- UbIic STATE OF MINNESOTA 1 "cm Srckl, leshes- COUNTY OF HENNEPTN ) The foregoinq instrument was acknowledged t efore sic► this day of 19 " i'y� ry Public — - of 15 HENN. Co. 14EVA-1 cc DOT ACC065 "—OVAL R OVICK MKC STATE AID H-V� y 1-1 � A Fac t VCAI&)F 44e .&P.G 40 Co q7 if rz 0 A I t- , " Z. I T E. I ,, kL W/C~C.* 5-LAS kh5.e(A4vo_v Tz", Cry t.,(4YZA-rA 'Z Z5 !rr NO. 6 I �IprAA,Cfirt.l�►L ,... ,,.. RETd►il O►R�A 20 Y Zs = Soo 5F, // SPA I-Ee C-LoS a a fLET01� oREa► �` W�SFGARvcrL F�i-zor <.Ty C,'iNcWDCD a, C�A4eXUa(. t„lAyZoTA /"1 A lK) $U (Dt OPE�J �Pl�RCEi NO 'SALES PERMUJUD MINUTES OF THE, ORONO COUNC31. MHET1 NG III-'L ) MARCH 11 , 1985. PACT-: G #892 MORTENSON Thomas Mortenson stated that he will be removing a f l.at stone walkway to reduce some of the hardcover. Mortenson noted that the existing garage extends into the street right of way. Mort-nson stated that Planning Commission asked him to cut his proposal back to only allow 30 percent hardcover and he has done so. Councilmember Frahm felt that the proposal included too much hardcover allowed for the property. Mayor Butler noted that the applicant has been subjected to two 75' setbacks. Councilmember T. Adams stated that the applicant should have to use the special decking treatment so that the City will not have to consider the deck hardcover, thereby reducing the overall hardcover on the property. Councilmember L. Adams moved, Mayor Butler seconded, to approve Resolution #1734, A Resolution Approving a Variance to Thomas Mortenson to allow the construction of an addition and a garage limiting the hardcover to 30 percent. Motion, Ayes ( 2) , Nays ( 2) . Counci lmembers Frahm and T. Adams voted nay. Councilmember T. Adams moved, Councilmember Adams seconded, to approve Resolution #1734, A Resolution Approving A Variance to Thomas Mortenson to allow the construction of an -.ddition and garage limiting the hardcover to 27 percent subject to staff adding language to the resolution concerning the special decking treatment. Motion, Ayes (3), Nays (1). Councilmember Frahm vote nay. Frahm felt that this was too much hardcover to allow within the 0-250' setback zone. #893 SUMMF.RFIELD FARMS '39-00 WAYZATA BLVD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION #1735 Glenn Nellist and Lowell Schaper were present. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explaii.ed that the applicants are seeking an amendment to the original resolution that approved the operation of the store. Mabusth stated that they are seeking approval of two additional uses of the store: mini -bakery and delicatessen use. Mabusth stated that during the review by the Planning Commission, applicants _.:dressed their desire to have one picnic table in the defined sales area to be used by hikers and bikers that sometimes stop into the store and have no place to consume the products they have_-, purchased. Mabusth stated that the intent of the picnic table is not to have employees serve customers, but to have the customer purchase the item f rcin the retail counter . MahuSth started that the proposal dc,, n(t al pear to be an intensif it_ation cf the existing use. MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL. MIA-1-TING HEILD MARCii 1 1 , 1985. PAGli 7 #893 SUMMERFIELD Glenn Nellist stated that frozen dough will be used and the FARMS (CONT.) store will not be a full fledged bakery that bakes from scratch. Nellist stated that the delicatessen use will be sometime later because of Hennepin County's requirements and it will take longer for them to comply. Mayor Butler felt that the proposed use was not an intensification but merely a trade off between other things that are sold. Mayor Butler moved, Councilmember T. Adams seconded, to approve Resolution #1735, a Resolution approving an amendment to the original resolution allowing them to use a mini -bakery and delicatessen for preparing of party trays, subject to staff underlining the word "served" in the resolution in order to clarify that the store is not to be used as a restaurant. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (0). RESOLUTION #1736 RESOLUTION #1.737 TAX FORFEIT LOTS Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the f irst resolution is to release tax forfeit lands for sale to adjacent owners. Mayor Butler moved, Councilmember L. Adams seconded, to approve Resolution #1736, A Resolution releasing tax forfeited lands for sale to adjacent land owners. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (0). Zr>ning Administrator Mabusth stated that the second resolution is a resolution releasing lands for public sale. Council felt that they would rather keep the property for park purposes. Mayor Butler moved, Councilmember L. Adams seconded, to appr,_✓.- Resolution #1737, and directing staff to revise such resolution to note that the City will retain the lands for public park purposes. Motion. Ayes (4), Nays (0). STATUS MEMO REGARDING AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 10.55 Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has contacted the City asking the City to adopt their ordinances regarding specific setbacks for different lakes in Orono. Mabusth noted that the DNR has not contacted Orono's surrounding cities that share some of those same lakes, but still expects the City to adopt their ordinances. Mayor Butler moved, Councilmember L. Adams seconded, to direct staff to draft a letter outlining the City's wetlands and f loodplain ordinances along with copies of the code to he sent to the DNR. Motion, Ayc-. (4), Nays (0). s ?77 E t-ft 1�-LB Fn )'1- .5 F r,es I, 1Jl a r k e, 7 3"Soo IJ�7 zllzn t-�}vd. 1 - to 5ca�t�. LJ es i PCL r k t n4 A rea t-.e a t J wes� Pr r !'vt-lieh �J .b i���. A ►,ox. 16 1 y ? FEB - 5 Im :l LIC 1�.� ,' _ 9t: v-m /L A&-ii-A Ifl4.17 A H ,pis �t e► � fF I F'd t" k eT* 9 00 Ut �) 7- a t za 131 vd. Ues Pa r kin:r'q Area '- 5 3 0 FEB 51935 CITY F 0 RON Wmx A"A 14 c o U;041va lieu Re tA' f -71 Lc ,qC 7,1AL NOTE: Add this to 5/26/87 agenda. To: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson fly .1 IL URGHO From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: May 25, 1987 Subject: #1.127 Richard E. Brown/Richard Erickson, 1245-1295 Sixth Avenue North - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Resolution List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Memo & Exhibits of 4/15/87 Exhibit B - Planning Commission Minutes of 4/20/87 Exhibit C - Pesolution This is a lot line rearrangement consisting of a trade-off of a 0.15 acre parcel in order to provide a location for a tennis court within the Brown property. The Brown and Erickson properties are 5.7 dry acres and 9.5 dry acres respectively. One area of concern was noted by staff during the Planning Commission review of this project, that of a catch basin and draintile located approximately on the line between the two properties. This minor drainage system is likely beneficial in keeping the proposed tennis court area dry, but may have a detrimental effect on the proper functioning of the Erickson septic system. Brown intends to relocate the catch basin to a point where neither it nor the draintile will be under the tennis court, and will not effect the Erickson septic system. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval per the attached resolution. City of ORO O RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING A METES AND BOUNDS CLASS I SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT FOR RICHARD E. BROWN FILE NO. 1127 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision by Richard E. Brown (hereinafter. "the subdivider") of property legally described on the Certificate of Survey by hark S. Gronberg dated 5- 20-86/2-6-87 revised 3-12-87, revised 3-16-87 and attached to this resolution as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the City for metes and bounds subdivision for division and combination purposes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the metes and bounds division of a lot line rearrangement for Richard E. Brown as shown on the Certificate of Survey by Mark S. Gronberg dated 5-20-86/2-6-87, revised 3-12-87, revised 3-16-87 and attached to this resolution as Exhibit A, subject to the following conditions: 1. Upon approval of the subdivision by the City Council of Orono, the owner of Parcel 1 as described in the Certificate of Survey referenced above must apply to the City for legal combination for tax purposes with Parcel 2. as described in that same survey. Likewise, the owner of Parcel 3 must apply to the City for legal combination with Parcel 4. 2. Upon relocation of the catch basin and underground draintile, near Parcels 2 and 3, the property owners shall grant to the City a drainage easement 5' either side of such catch basin and draintile, such easement to he filed in the chain of title of the affected properties. 3. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with the Hennepin County Recorder's office on or before November 26, 1987 together with a certified original copy of this Resolution. The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file: a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Page 1 of 2 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota, this 26th day of May, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: April 15, 1987 Subject: #1'_27 Richard E. grown.,/Richard Erickson, 1245-1295 Sixth !Avenue North - Preliminary Subdivision - Lot Line Rearrangement - Public Hearing Application - Lot line rearrangement, property trade to accommodate proposed tennis court at 1245 Sixth Avenue North. Zoning District - LR-lA, 2-acre unsewered, lakeshore List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map F.xhi.bi.t C - Property Owners List Exhibit. D - Survey With Proposed Dividing Line Exhibit E - StaffSketch and Notes Regarding Location and Conditions of Septic System, 1295 Sixth Avenue North Pertinent Facts: - Lot size, 1245 Sixth (Brown): 5.7 acres +/- dry - Lot size, 1295 Sixth (Erickson): M.5 acres +/- dry - Proposed tradeoff: 0.1.5 acres fo-c 0.15 acres (see survey) - The site of the proposed tennis court is perhaps the only flat site n (partially on) the Brown property large enough for a tennis court. Discussion: In concept, staff has no problem with the proposed tradeoff of land to accommodate the tennis court. we would not allow such an accessory structure to be built owes the lot line, even if there was an easement granted between the owners, hence the lot line rearrangement is the proper approach. On 4/1.5/87 during staff review of the proposal on the site, it was not,_d that the existing septic system at 1295 Sixth is likely near but probably not over the new lot lint, as proposed, just west of the tennis court. Also to be noted is a catch basin adjacent to that drai.nfield area which apparently f lows into a tile or pipe that wi 1 I likely be under the tennis court and leads toward the north, discharging via a culvert north of the Erickson driveway. Zoning File #1127 April 15, 1987 Page 2 of 2 In my opinion, there is a potential that during wet. periods, this drainage system may act as a "short circuit" by collecting and discharging partially treated septic effluent to the surface. The drainfield serving 1295 is poorly located, in a low drainage basin that has no outlet other than the catch basin adjacent. If the catch basin is removed, the Erickson drainfield area might revert back to a swampy area, and septic system failure might occur because of that. The catch basin, on the other hand, is a desirable thing if the tennis court goes in, because it would help keep the area around the tennis court dry. But, we have some concern about the potential for Er. ickson's sewage to run under Brown's tennis court and out onto what appears to be Brown's property. Staff recommendation: Staff would recommend approval of the proposal as presented under the following conditions: 1. Erickson is advised that at some future date the drainfield may have to be relocated to an area where it A) is not close to property lines; and B) has less potential to cause a surface discharge via drainage infrastructure on the site. (This may require an effluent pump and perhaps a, additional tank in addition to new drainfield.) 2. Applicants must provide existing and proposed legal descriptions for Erickson property. C',rt °1 i Y-e ,,ie I-:> Date R,e�c' d By Fee Re,6' d /5 C CITY ON ORONO � � p . • ,a,,',�,, SUBDIVISION APPLICATION NORM APPLICANT Name ii (t, D }= (') �` ��" ; I i----- _--Telephone 73 "!� `.;44 Mailing Address 1 r ` ' -f lam' PPOPERTY Name 1 �) ►(N i(. 7) i � / )) p \ __ _� _ _ � 1111% f �� �- � I L �, Tee hone OWNER HZ-LA 15' VF_.^Ja V-T9-i Mailing Address / �- c ( /;) -'/ �`'1-� (- (Attach list if more than one --------------------------------------------- _--------- ------------------ PROPERTY LOCATION �{ S► xrM U ��� v E AlC r'r I-� Street Address Property Identification No. (P.I.D.) Complete Legal Description to be attached to application ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present. Use (check) Present Zonina District Acres Dry Land Acres wet Land Acres Tot -al, all parcels i Residential; no. of units other. (specify) PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rca-rr.ar.gem(-.>>it- Only no :ie.'A building sites) Subdivision fcr New Pui.ldincl Sires Ndnmbf-r of building Sitc-.: - Exi::.ting Units N-w Units al Units Prupo:;ed Gi-ost. C?(�n5 i t: y Units per Acres Minimum Lot � quary Feet Dry F3ui ldable Land I�r�_�por,c�d a ,r : t c���c.k) �_ Reyidc�ntial other. (specify) MINIMUM MATERIAL NECLSSARY F ' COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPI.ICAT.ION 1. Application Co* leted 2. Preliminary Plat information on _'or.tificatr� of Survey. 3. Certified Prgp^Yty Owner's list of owners %ithin 350' (this lis `e obtained from the Hennepin County Departme: of Finance A-603 Governiw_,nt "inter 348-3271) 1. Stamped, legal sided envelores ( #J 0) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above :..st with no ret. ddress. Certification by Zoning Department that Pre'iminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature MINIMUM 14ATERTAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE FINAI; PLA HPPLIC:ATION 1. Payment f fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer a,.d water assessments; 2. Signed certificate of purvey or mylar copies 7 formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. 7asements, Covenorts, ei c. i. i)e- �lopere; Agrecment and r.cc-_,ptaolr :n of ity. Certificat_ c, by Zoning Department th.l. A plat .+pplication is complete. Lc-1?nq Off? '°.r^.ls Signatures T)"�e --------------------- ?I:ES Sketch Plan Review (Cla-: I, II i 11, $150.00 Prelimi•&ary k�view (C 'ivisions) $2,0.00 _ Praliminary Review tCla�•. III and all i — Final • ._ ,tevi.. as , . j an- I-qal or _ ug -:ha. a) 5300.00 plus 20.00/lot S? 0.00* Appl, -it has read the ano%#- and herel^t? agrees to provide all information required or-�_q,,, ited by t_he Zor.:r vidrr.inistra,or, . Ly Engineer, City Attorney, Pi3nninc7 c ummission and Ceuncil r, c -ssary to process this appli � ati on and further agrees to pay ..11 •, litiona' fees �-stabtish4.-J by ordinance. Applicant's 3Iq /-re -- .�� - -- _ — — -- Dzitts - - ')wner's a;un r!r'i� r - Gate y =� .----!� �--- -- - - -- - Applicar.: OU16 have I1 s ittali; a th- city office: S dayr before the Plaiinin., it^ Meet 'ng. Planning (umir) faion Meetinn. usually held on the third Mo.-day ou a month. 00S 330 0To a\3 —419— 0.0wee-Z-1 RUN OATE 03,107/87 BATCH 001 38 26-118-23 33 0029 F'POP AOOR C''NER N:nE WILLIAM P L EARBARA A PEt4CF TAhPAYER WILLIAM E B4PSAPA PEARCf N ME:'ADOR PO BOY 9300 MPLS MN 55440 38 26-118-27 Y4 MOP ADOR 01315 STY"CH AVE n a'iFR NAME M:.PY H D"-'rTO'1 T::-:PA rER MAP( H 04Y' "t NAME/A50P 17"S 6TH AVE N LCNG LAVE M1 553' +PPOP A^'a TAYpAYEP TOTAL CATCH 001 00306 t:A�•=/Au OR 4ENIIEPIN Cf)."i'.Y PROPERTY I4FCRMATION SYSTEM POPERTY CHZNEPS LIST 38 26-118-23 34 0001 01245 SIXTH AVE N E ERO!%'l E 11 F BP%lN RI -HARD E ERC' :N 12 i5 COUNTY RD 6 LCN- LAY,E MN 55356 38 26-118-23 34 0005 E W R H S SPENCER EDSON W 8 HAPPIET S SPENCER PO BOX 5,4 MPLS M14 55356 REPORT NO. PI4354CI PAGE 1 38 26-118-23 34 0002 01295 SIXTH AVE N R A ERICKSON & J E CCRTY RICHARD ERICKSON/JULIE CORTY 1295 CD RD NO 6 URCI-O MN 55356 38 26-118-23 34 0006 01I45 SIXTH AVE N MALCOLM S MACKAY ET AL MALCOLM 5 MACKAY 1145-6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS P.EPRESE'.TEU ARE 'N ACCURATE AND TRUE RFPRESENTATION OF INFOR'7ATION A3 IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO E BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. /�� /(,/'Q DATr.. IIp1 / V BY i I\. h I ....Line parn;le\ VIA, Soot i (int of Sac to-nB•zs � ......(,Ines Oo•aUel wilvy F1as} i'Ir,, �.-- •" Wes! '1bdV 4 sw %4 rS Sr, tr• its . 1 I 1 41 02 Eosfi line A we"61�of SW %4 0� Src. 26 u8-23 , Drlvewa„ Easement ' If CO Per U,e,. 101091 ' Z � � 1-4 fICG� I N , ' 4Z, j_ \ I ''1'^ro►N� Gsa� r-,r ^M� I o Teeely 1 1 _... j► r,83.ac-- � f, ^� ��'� � x see �,e.-ttA•7` f �.. 00 c.• w. •f •� I '� s f^+• roan wuV bn1 `^ D« S•� ���as 1^ I °r�P4�ed E,Itt,nq . - - - 7ZS Op - - - - o Tenn�t Ga r a IA C Eala�lnq c oar} I Shfdad J — _ } - 00 a 1 1 1� r t t It LlP•'"p Sher'• „t nr� • - 2eA Sec! n1'rt oZ `V Cl .� QOta•TCn} Sri / No 1?• �� � S fee• rosdvr� q�d ' D.. �.0 19vlot OK e 1 � f ; rEaiA line ak 1.le.� halla� 5W %4, ol sec.. ZV • t19`= 23 1 YG�1 725 Oo - _ b 1 76 t N I /"l` j J 1 f �I' 42 pt 30 2 a ....line pwa%,k W-A, SoAt t 'f LIneS owallel with F—.s} l ",- . Wes 4 ��u1 F o S w %A c3 Sic to u9 . 7 poop, Dr,vewav Easement as rer Doc tot�g83 ' \ r: (Ni i 1 ' .UI�Z 1 � osed' Er�fl,� kA o Tenn G'�e m 4he4 9 Al EXHIBIT E #1127 4-15-87 1 - SEPTIC TANK - Tanx is very deep, has a precast cover with open chamber and cast iron MH cover at UrI...ce -'4 0wT' 2 - "AERATOR" TANK - Probably "Coolbroth" system; Same as tank 1, but baffle plate in the middle TD /° view 3 - AERATION ELECTRICAL BOX - Ii: turns out that there is no compressor in the box, just wires and a receptacle. Presume that compressor aeration system was removed some years ago and is currently not in use, hence tank 2 is functioning as a septic tank. 4 - 4- PVC CLEANOUT, at an angle with plumb, presume it leads to distribution box 5 - CATCH BASIN-- Iron grate, 2' diam rock -lined basin about 4' deep, has an outlet pipe + 6-8" diam. Heading to N-NE, about 6" above bottom, current water level 4" + above bottom (below outlet pipe invert), does not smell like sewage, buC is located directly adjacent to drainfield area. Lrainfield area appears to be trenches or a b?d perhaps 75'-100' long, an Frea about 30'-40' wide, adjacent to but probably not encroaching upon proposed lot line as shown on sketc! 6 - AN ADDITIONAL CATCH BASIWI- did not open 7 - 12" CULVERT OUTLET- Inspector John Petran felt this was suspect and smelled c.)f sewage slightly, had a sample of discharge water tested, results were inconclusive (Fall '86) (770 Fecal Celif. Colonies Per 100ML) Exhibit E #1127 April 15, 1987 Page 2 of 2 I am presuming that catch basin ( 5 ) is connected by a tile to catch basin (6) and culvert (7). It is my opinion that during wet seasons, the existing drainfield serving 1295 Sixth Avenue N. has a high potential to seep or flow into catch basin (5) and eventually outlet to the surface at cuvlert (7). MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD APRIL 20, 1987 ATTL•:NDANCE 7:01 P.M. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chairman Kelley, Taylor, Hanson, Johnson, and Brown. Cohen arrived at 7:26 P.M. lows was absent. The following represented the City staff- Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Peterson. COUILcilmember Sime was also present. 41127 RICHARD E. BROWN/RICHARD ERICKSON 1245/1295 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH SUBDIVISION - CLASS I PUBLIC HEARING 7:34-7:46 Tt , Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailinq was noted. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the regc.est for a lot line rearranrenient involving a property trade to accomodate a proposed tennis court at 1245 Sixth Avenue North. Conceptually, staff has r,o problem with the proposed tradeoff of lunJ k.:?cauce joth properties are in excess of 2 acres. There is an existing septic system at 1295 Sixth Avenue North near the: new lot line proposed; and a catch basin adjacent to the drainfield area which apparently flows into a tile or pipe that will likely be under the tennis court discharging via a culvert north of the Erickson driveway. Staff feels there is a potential that during wet periods, this '-ai. systeri may act as a "short circuit" by collet. , and uischarging partially +-reated septic effluent to the surface. The drainfield serving 1295 is poorly located, in a low drainage basin that has no outlet other than the catch basin adjace-t. If the catch basin is removed, the Erickson drainfield might revert back to a swampy area, and septic system failure might occur because of that. The catch basin i a desirable thing if the tennis court goes in, because would help keep the area around the tennis court dry. Staff has sor concern about the potential. for Frickson's sewage to run under Brown's tennis court and out onto Brown's property. Gaffron recommended teat the catch basin be relocated and regraded. Ile aleo recommended taking a drainage and utility easement. "linninq Commission agreed with staff's concerns and it.commendation. Mr. & Mrs. Frown were present for this matter. Mr.. Brown stated that the mair, reason for the proposed placement of the tennis court is to avoid the excessive removal of t -ees. MINUTES OF THE, PLA14NING COAMMISSION MEETING HELD APRII, 20, 1987 #1127 BROWN/ERICKSON CONTINUED No one was present from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Cohen, to recommend approval of the lot line reari ngement per staff recommendation and subject t. 1. Catch basin ;4 -a4-ni4&4%+ being rerouted, elevations to be approved by staff. 2. Granting of appropriate 5' drainage easement. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. #1128 RAINEY ANDERSON 780 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - CLASS III PUBLIC HEARING 7:47-8:06 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Appl' nt's agent, Gary Gabriel, was present for this r nttt Assistant. Zoning Administrator Gaffron reviewed the four lots involved and the proposed staged development plan. The proposal involves a four lot subdivision, of which three 'Lots have a pote. tial for further development. Staff suggested and applicant proposed a "phased" road development scheme that requires a short length of private road be c_nstructed to serve this initial division, leaving a road outlot as access for future development cf the rear parcels, with road extension to be constructed at such time future development occurs. Staff recommends tabling this application pending additional information regarding the County Road access location and septic testing. Chairman Kelley voiced concerns regarding "piecemeal" or "staged" development. Johnson asked what the intended purpose of Outlot C was. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated it could be used as a buffer from 790 Old Crystal Bay Road or be sold to that property owner for additional property. Chairman Kelley felt a ,:ore concrete proposal was needed before c-n.sidering a subdi'vision. Planning Coma-issicn concurred. Dennis Kumlin, 2625 Fox Street, was present for this matter and had no comments at this point. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded L. Coh,.rn, to table this matter per staff rF.\•commendation pending additional information. Motion, Aye's 6, Nays 0. 2 1987 To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator CP From: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Coordinator Date: May 20, 1987 Subject: Park Commission Chair Appointment On May 4, 1987, Mr. Terry Morse resigned his position 4s Park Commission Chairperson. On May 12, 1987, at a regular Park Commission meeting, the Park Commission reviewed the matter and voted to recommended Park Commission Member Robert Kost be appointed chair of the Commission effective May 26, 1987. TO: Mayon and City Council 1 ; }ROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrate Attachment: A. Robert Kost Resume Mr. Kost has been a member of the- Park Commission for 2 1/2 year. Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by _ the council appoint Park Commission member Robert Kost as Chii r of the Park Cormission effective May 16, 1987. Ayes Pays - .•. -- CI 'IT b) F ()1 01110 robot' 1. Kurt 3�R5 ;tal Place ►?.ty:::at.,, 11innc rota 55391 January 17, 1905 Door Mo . Ila l l i n a I nm intorestcd in a poait;cn on the Cite of Orono Planning Cor;ainnion. I have lived in Orono :or iienrly awo, yearn. Prior to building my i.Qne in Orono, ny uifu Carolyn and I lived in hound and thon in rxccllsior. ainca racniviag my hnchelors dnUrcr,. from thn Univk. y of 111i:,oir., I have wor!:�id w, a 1r7dpinunor .ard c?^sii for several TAn Citic-: '_;,acid nrchitrctural planning fir -.in. I n.n prnwl to h^ a re:id.n.nt of Orono nnA would li};e to na,inL in forr-iletinq d^cinion-; i:n-1 proc,otinq actions which will help the cr,:..:,unity r,+.iinti:in a E,lcasant, c?f cctivc: envi,:op-mont. Thank you for thin opportunity. if you rodui:o any ot!,.ur inforr-nt io+;, plc ,.rc Cali 70 of 41.-4137; or E131-4140. :nectivcly, 52087.2 4 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: -ar'c Bernhardson, City Administcatorl DHT' ray 20, 1987 SUB.7 FT: 1 ar- Commission Va; ancy Appointment -�-Tjj G r , 1987 ISSEE - Selection A ,a Park Commission,�_,� to fill the vacancy created by the resi_ of Terry Morse. INTRODUCTION - Dore. c 'nterviewes in January and F'ebr.uaL. £h,err were three appL _,ants for two Park positions spots in addition the persons who had been interviewed for. Planning Commission and Council were asked if they would be willing to serve in another capacity, most of those did. Below is listed the names of the individuals and the positions for which they originally applied: Counc i 1 Gary Printup, 1201 Briar Street Earl Dorn, 4045 Watertown Road Thomas Casey, 2785 Shadywood Road Planning Commission Curtis Quady, 1223 Brown Road South Lee Schacht, 285 Leaf St, -et Jorja Lynn, 1265 Bracketts Point Road Clement Birch, Jr.,2205 Bayview Place James Berg, 2655 Lydiard Avenue Gai_ Livingston, 2885 Sixth Avenue North LaDean McWilliams, 1130 Willew Drive South Park Com.ais- -n Ron Ando-rson, T?55 Arbor Street r7urrently the members of �t- Park (.(.)mmission are as foll )ws: Lee rger Lester Kelley Mariann Kienzlor Philip Bradley Robert M. Kost Virginia Sweatt Bruce Kokal .rys1 al Bay Road Colin Drive 121 Old Crystal Bay Rd S 4075 nay Street 3585 tal -lace 3225 uci. is , pint Road 2265 L .sc in L.1ne 0:-OMMENDATION - It s recommended t it the Cou. 7il select an rrciividual from this l--t to fil* the irrent vacancy created by Terry Mores' resigna•_ PROPOSED Mr CION - Mr-,Yed by _, sewn led „y , that : Council appoint _ as the ind i v id-ual to f i 1 . th- Park Cot mission vacancy createa_by Terry Morss' resin `on. E ;;es Nayc 52087.3 TO: Mayor nd City Counc i-1 PJAY 2 G i987 FROM: Mark Be nhardson, City Administrator CITY, OF ORONO DATE: May 20, 198; SUBJECT: Charles Henke, 3536 Lyric Avenue - Revocation of Temporary Certificate of Occupancy Attachments: A. City Attorney's Memorandum Dated 5/15/87 B. Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Recommendation of the Admii,;strative Law Judge Dated 2/26/87 C. Henke's Letter to Administrative Law Judge D. Resolution for Revocation of Temporary Certificate of Occupancy ISSUE. -- Determining if it is appropriate to revoke the temporary certificate of occupancy issued to the property described above issued in July of 1983. INTRODUCTION - Attached are the materials that outline a case that commenced in 1983 when Mr. Henke indicated that the piece of property the City was contemplating hazardous building proceedings on, he was going to purchase it and live in it temporarily until such time as he wou l ci b2 able to tear down the structure .and build a new one. A temporary certificate of occupancy was issued to him based on certain requirements be taken care of. Fah indicated that he would take care of those and subsequently Gated that he would not tear down the house. Since the hay ba_es had not been removed from the foundation it was noted that the foundation was now an issue. Temporary certificate of occupancy dial not have a expiration date on it . The City tried to work wi.h Mr. Henke to resolve the problem including directing him to iinancial assistance t-7 t.ake care the matter, however these have proven fruitless. In order to give Mr. Henke his due process this ,,_.tter was put before a Law Judge for an independent third opinion prior to revocation on January 21, 1987. 1t wa-- the Law Judge's recommendation as noted in Attachment n that the temporary certificate of occupancy be revoked. DISCUSSION - In order to officially revoke the temporary certificate of occupancy in this case it is appropriate that the Council conduct: ,-.i hearing to allow Mr. Henke the opportunity to present his case and for the Council to make a decision as to wheth^r the certificate of cx--cup.anr.y should he revoked. REC:OMMFNDATION - It is -taff's, rec.•ommend3tion based on testimony t.c�da!P thatr the at t ached resolution revok incl the certificate of occupancy hn adopted fuel lowing the prr:,entat ion by Mr. Henke. i PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconc, i by , to adopted resolution number which revokes the temporary certificate of occupancy for the property at 3536 Lyric Avenue. Ayes `, Nays City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1% RESOLUTION ORDERING ABATEMENT OF HA%ARDOUS BUILDING ACTION AT 3536 LYRIC AVENUE, ORONO WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Richard Bowman Gilmore, Mary Ellen Anthony and Audry S. Gi lmOre ar- the owners of record and Charles Lewis Henke has an interest in the property located at 3536 Lyric Avenue, Orono, Minnesota, herein referred to as "the property", and legally described as follows: Lots 19 & 20, Block 4, "Navarre Heights", Hennepin Co nty, Minnesota (P.I.D. 17-117-23 43 0056); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono, having duly con =>idered the matter pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 463.15 to 463.761, hereby finds that the above described property is uninhabitable and contains unsanitary and hazardous conditions which constitute a public nuisance and which makts this property hazardous to the public_ health, safety and welfare basc,6 on the following findings: 1. OveL two layers of roofing materials on 2r.4 rafters; 2. Improper footings - cr�ncrete blocks stacked without mortar in joints - improper depth. 3. Building is in a state of deterioration and dilapidation, thus i.4- is a safety and health haz.,rd pursuant to Minnesota State Building Code/Uniform Building Code, Section 203. 4. Orders to remove or repair the structure were issued by the Building Official on February 19, 1985 and September 10, 1986. These orders have not been complied with. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: 1. That the City Council of the City of Orono, pursuant to State Statute 463.251., hereby orders the owner(s) to board -up and secure the structure. within ten (10) days. The City Council further orders that unless corrective Action is taken within ter, (10) days from the date of service of this order, it wi l l result in the City propcarl y securing the bui ldi.ng and the cost therco4- will, be charged against the reel estate -rs provider! in Suite: Statute Se.>%•tion 163.21. 2. The City Counci l of the City of oro> O, rjr:,uant to the forego nq findi.n(ts and in accordance with Mir-nf,sota �tatutvs Sections 463.: ) to 463.261. hereby or,lvr�. the owner(s) of thr property to make the following repairs in order to corre(_•t th,,� irdou!- condition: PA(le 1 of City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. a. Provide new roof; b. Provide proper footings and foundation; c. Provide proper maintenance to structure to prevent deterioration. 3. If the repairs )re not completed by June 15th, 1987, or unless an answer is f i leu w_' thin twenty (20) days from the date of service of this order, the City shall move the District. Court for summary enforcement of this order. 4. If an answer is filed that conrests the hazardous building action, the matter shall be tried and decided by the District Court. If the order is sustained by the Court, ti.e Court shall fix a time after which the building shall be destroyed or repaired as set forth in M.4 nnesota Statutes Section 463.20. 5. If the Court's Judgment is not complied with in the time prescribed, the City may make the ordered repairs, raze or remove the hazardous condition or building, or acquire the building and real estate on which the building or hazardous condition is located by eminent domain. The necessary costs of such repairs, razing or removal, including but not limited to attorney fees, witness fees and filing fees, shall be a lien against the real estate on which the hazardous condition exists and will. be levied against the property as set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section 463 zi and 463.22. 6. That the City Council of the City of Orono hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor, City Clerk, City Attorney, and other officers and employees of the City to take such action, prepare, sign and serve such papers as are necessary to comply with this order and to assess the cost thereof against the real estate described above for collection along with taxes. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, this 26th day of May, 1987. AT'PF.ST : Dorothy M. 1i�311in, ('ity e'le rk APPROVED: F`oq( fit MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Members FROM: City Attorney-V DATE: May 15, 1987 RE: Henke Temperary.Certificate of Occupancy D- Lam. __ _�►.� I Set forth below is a factual and legal analysis of the Henke matter scheduled on May 26, 1987. I have also attached copies of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Recommendation issued by an Administrative Law judge on this matter and Mr. Henke's exceptions to the re^ommendation. 7f you have any questions about this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me at the offi(,e or at -ny home, 884-8679. FACTS The structurally inferior condition of the ho_ine located at 3535 Lyric Avenue ("house") and presently owned by Mr. Charles Henke has been of issue with the City of Orono ("City") for many years. The house lacks a structurally solid foundation, and footings and instead is precariously resting on cement blocks which do not extend below the frost lire. Such a condition is in violation of the Uniform Buildinj Code (UBC) and the State Building Coee (SBC) Section 2997. In addition to the footing and foundation violations, the roof on the house is in a state of disrepair and dc.es not pr)v de adequate protection iron tY.e ele-ment-P. As such, the roof is in violation of UBC/SBC, Section 3212. Mr. Henke was allowe<; t;-> rnove .nto `he house on D( (•ember 2 1, 1953, , the n :I~ .rn '';_. ;,, —,lm ?l y with the s UBC/SBC by installing footings, a foundation, and by repairing the roof. July 31, 1983 was the agreed upon completion date. Such conditions were set forth in a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. Mr. Henke signed the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy and moved into the house with full knowledge of the City's expectations and the fact that he was in violation of the respective codes. The City, as testified to at the hearing, would not have issued the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy had the City staff knowledge that Mr. Henke did not intend to abide by the conditions agreed upon. The house, at the time it was f:'urchased by Mr. Henke, was severely deteriorated with filth and debris strewn throughout the premises. As such it posed a threat to the public health, safety and welfare of the community. Upon the death of the previous owner and prior to Mr. Henke's interest in the property, the City had posted the house to give notice to all perspective purchasers that any future occupant would need to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the City. At the same time, the City began to take s eps to condemn the house. [,upon notice that a Certificate of Occupancy was nee�2ed from the City, Mr. Henke contacted the City Inspector, Mr. Thomas Ja,obs, to discover what remed.al steps were needed to be crone in order to make the house hatitable. Mr. Menke told the City Inspector that he into-nded to live in the house until su..'.mer, at which time he wr.,u,"! teir the ^,tructure down and build a ;1'W house. �'.f,l v;I '; :.'}7 <3 .tated objective, the rite Inspector listed nine improvements that had to be made before the house could be inhabited on a temporary basis. The unsound footings and foundation were not detected at this time due to the existence of hay bales around the base of the house. After Mr. Henke completed the majority of the improvements, Mr. Henke notified the City Inspector that he had changed his mind and that now he intended to make the house his permanent dwelling. Mr. Jacobs then stated that under that condition, the footings, foundation and roof would have to be repaired prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Due to the winter cold and the difficulty the weather posed for construction, t}e fact that. Mr. Henke apparently needed immediate housing, and the fact that he had cooperated with the City to this point, 'she City agreed Lo issue a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy with the conditions that the roof, footings and foundation be repaired by July 31, 1983. Since the signing of the Temporary Ce_tificate of Cccupancy Agreement by Mr. Here, the City has encountered nothing but resistance from Mr. Henke and his refusal to fulfill the terms of the Agreement. Initially. the City attempted to work with M,. Henke to facilitate thF repairs. The City provided Mr. Henke with information regarding available cummunity development bloc; grant monien that would have substantially reduced the costs of improvement to Mr. Henke. Although he indicated to us that such application has been made, Mary Anna Hernandey, a representative from the office administerinj such men en, denied hearing from Mr. Henke. 3- The City also provided Mr. Henke with information regarding alternative pier footings and foundation types in order that the building be made secure at a minimal cos: to him. As testified to at the hearing by the City inspector, it was apparent that Mr. Henke chose to ignore this information and instead obtained quotes for repairs teat involved work beyond what is necessary to meet the UBC/SBC regulations. Mr. Henke's adamant refusal to remedy the structural defects of t.is house, forced the City to reek redress in District Court. A citation was issued to Mr. Henke on September 21, 1984. citing Mr. Henke for his violation of UBC/SBC Section 2907. The City Attorney had the matter set for hearing but later continued it for dismissal until Jule 23, 1985, upon the decision of the City Council to allow Mr. Henke additional time to complete the necessary improvements. The City Council arrived at its decision to extend the period after. holding a public hearing on the matter and allowing Mr. Henke to testify. Subsequent to the hearing, a letter from the City Attorney was sent to Mr. Henke setting forth an explanation of the C_ty's position. Mr. Henke did not correct_ the hazardous condition of his prcperty in the extended time period. Instead, he steadfastly adhered to his position that tie did not have a duty to correct the deficiencies of his building. On Octoher 10, 1985, the ?ty notified the District Court that a trial date w,j. nrr-!-":1 as the matt+7br ';ad not, been resn;vP,a. A trial was s ` for June 10, 1986. Subsequently, the prosecution was dismissed by the prosecutor upon consultation and agreement with the City staff that successful prosecution of the matter would not afford the City a remedy that would cause Mr. Henke to make the repairs. Therefore, the City has chosen to pursuE condemnation of the house as provided for in UBC/SBC Secti�: 203. Given the City's desire to protect the ri,hts of the parties involved, the City requested a hearing before an independent Administrative Law Judge before moving forward. Mr. Bruce Campbell, the Administrative Law Judge, held a four hour hearing on January 30, 1987 and issued an opinion regarding this matter on February 26, 1986. Judge Campbell recommended that the City Council declare the conditional Certificate of Occupancy void and require the vacation of the structure within thirty days, unless Mr. Henke complied with tt.s• JBC requirements relative to a secure foundation. Judge Campbell's Findings of Fact, Conclusions 5 pecormendation, while not binding on the City, are instructive an.', supportive of the City's position that the Temporary Certificate cf Occupancy should be revoked and hazardous building pr.,ceedings commenced. After ti;e iss,.iance of t.`,e r :?commendation, Mr. Henke was Given the opportu-,i~;, to forward any exceptions he had to t`:e City. Mr. Henke's atta-lit-d I;ereto, .:et forth his contention that because he was not given proper advance notice of the need for structural improvemLnts he is not bound to meet the conditions of the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. ANALYSIS Section 2.01 of the City of Orono Municipal Code ("code") incorporates by reference the State Building Code, 1982 editioq, as amended by rules published and adopted by the State Registrar datejFebruary A, 1983. The State Building Code, in turn, adepts by reference the 1982 edition of the uniform Building Code. Minnesota Rules 1305.1000, Section 307, allows municipalities to require Certificates of Occupancies for single family dwellings. Section 104(b) of the UBC/SBC states that althoug alterations and repairs may be made to a building without requiring the whole building to comply with all the requirements of the code, the alterations and repairs shall rot cause an existing building or structure to become unsafe or over loaded. The improvements made to the structure by Mr. Henke prior to his occupying have increased the urgency for the improvement of the footings and foundation. The interior of the house which previously was constructed of cardboard ceilings aA wails was completely sheet rocked. In addition, a wood curni ,q stove and appl' -nes were added to the house. Such change.; have increase! weight of the home, thus causing `e - meat Clocks ru 7arning the house to become even more Structurally inyound and strew7vJ. Furthermore, Section 203 of the UBC/SBC, which operates independently of Section 104(b), declares that any building that is structurally unsafe or otherwise dangerous to life is a public nuisance. Public nuisances, as set forth in the code, must be abated by repair, rehabilitation, demolition or removal. In the instant case, the Henke house is a public nuisance. The structural unsoundness of e building poses a threat to the neighborhood. Children can easily crawl under the house and become seriously injured should the blocks supporting the house shift. Such a shift could also injure Mr. Henke should he be near or in the home. In its attempt to honor Mr. Henke's property rights in the Louse, the City has been ciligent in affording Mr. Henke ample opportunity to repair the home as well as to be heard before the City Council. .he City staff has worked w4.th him over a period of years, but to no avail. In addition to providing Mr. Henke with information about alternative ways to meet the code requirements as well as to obtain financial assistance, the staff encouraged Mr. Henke to provide the City with an o,alysis from a certified professional engineer that the buildi:g -,as `act sound. Mr. Henke cht-se not to buttress his asLe rtions in this, or any other, way. '-rune of the tity's ak.tion3 have eiic ted Mr. Henke's cooperation. Instead, Mr. Henk— refused to live �ip to the ter'!' `Jf t�-.E (_t'rthat he sirjned. MGrf.`cvk,r , yr. 'I r E' ? t ^.N f,. sward rl:th any professional support for his repeated assertions that the building is structurally sound. CONCLUSION Based on the facts as set forth in this record, the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy should be revoked and hazardous uuilding prcceedings commenced forthwith. KAB/jmp338t or STATE OF MINNESOTA OFFICE O►' ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS 400 SUMMIT BANK BUILDING 310 FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH MiNNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 55415 (612) 3tl•7600 February 26, 1987 Dorothy Hallin, Orono City Clerk C/O Kathleen Blatz Attornpy at Law 4344 ID; Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Re: Matte- of Certificate of Occupancy of Charles Henke, 3536 Lyric Avenue, Wayzata, MN 55391; OAH Docket No. CITY-87-012-BC, 2-2101-1222-3. ys. Blatz: Lnclosed anj served upon you by mail, please find the Findings of Fact, Lonclusions and Recommendation of the Administrative Law Judge in the above -entitled matter. I also enclose the official record, and I am closing our file in this matter. BDC:ir Enclosures cc: ��Ithleen Blatz Charles Menke Yours very truly BRUCE D. CAMPBELL Administrative Law Judge Telephone: 612/341-7602 AN EOUAL OPPC'RTUN!TY EMPLOYER .1M�Wc CITY-87-012-BO 2-2101-1222-3 STATE OF MINNESOTA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS FOR THE CITY OF ORONO In the Matter of the Certificate of Occupancy of Charles Henke, 3536 Lyric Avenue, Wayzata, MN 55391 FINDINGS 0r FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION . The above -entitled matter came on, for hearing before Bruce D. Campbell, Administrative Law ,fudge from the Minnesota Office of Administrative Hearings, acting as Hearing Officer for the City of Orono, in Minneapolis, Minnesota on January 30, 1987, pursuant to a Notice and Order for Hearing dated December 31. 1986. Appearances: Kathleen A. Blatz, Attorney at Law, 4344 IDS Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402, appeared on behalf of the City of Orono (City or Complainant); and Charles Henke, 3536 Lyric Avenue, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 (Mr. Henke), appeared on his own behalf without counsel. The record herein closed on February (20, 1987, after receipt ,y the Administrative Law Judge of the final post -hearing brief. Following the issuance of this Report, the matter will be considered by the Orono City Council which has the ultimate authority to accept, modi`y, or reject any of the Findings or Conclusions, as well as to make the final decision regarding the Certificate of Occupancy issued to Charles Henke for the property at 3536 Lyric Avenue, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391. Persons desiring •:) file exceptions to this Report must do so within ten days of the date of this Report. Exceptions should be specific and must be served on the opposing party and filed with the City Clerk of the City L_ Orono. Her address is: Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk, 1335 South Brown Road. Orono, Minnesota 55323. Persons desiring to appear before the City Council in connection with this matter should, also, contact V'e City Clerk of tnt City of Orono to determine the meeting at which the City Council will .onsider this Report. The provisions cf the Minnesota Administrative Procedures Act relating to �cntested cases, Minn. Stat. §§ 14.57 - 14.69 (i986), do not apply to this proceeding. STATEMENT OF ISSUES The issues to be determined in this proceeding are whether the Con;, cional Certificate of Occupancy issued to Charles Henke fcr the property located at 3536 Lyric Avenue, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 is void for failure to install footings and a foundation and repair the roof, and, if so, whether the building must be vacated. Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, and on all the files, records and proceedings herein, the Hearing Officer makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The City of Orono is G municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota. It has, by ordinanr., adopted the Uniform Building Code as of 1977. Orono Municipal Code, sec. 2.01, 2. Some time prior to the firing of 1982, the owner of the property located at 3536 Lyric Avenue, Wayzata, Minnesota, died in the structure. His body remained for a period of time in that building. Upon recovering the Body from the structure, police officials became concerned with the dilapidated condition of the building generally, and its interior in particular. City Ex. 2. The police requested that the property be -seed as a health and safety hazard. The building was placed on a list .or ultimate condemnation. Any future occupancy of the structure would require a certificate of occupancy. 3. In May of 1982, Mr. Henke was seeking a low-cost structure in the metro area to occupy while he constructed a new dwelling. He investigated distressed properties in and around the Twin City area. The property at 3536 Lyric Avenue in Orono carve to his attention. 4. Prior to signing a purchase agreement, Mr. Henke wished to determine the cost of 'mproving the structure so as to allow temporary occupancy. On May 10, 1982, Mr. Henke met with the City Bui'ding Inspector, Mr. Thomas Jacobs, ano inquired about improvements to the property necessary for occupancy. He told Mr. Jacobs that he wished to live in the existing structure temporarily while he built a ne► residence on the lot. Mr. Henke is a construction worker who works in various parts of the Country. 5. On May 11, 1982, Mr. Jacobs inspected t property. He subsequently provided Mr. Henke with a list of improvements regoired for occupancy of the structure. Henke Ex. A. The Notice of Inspection does iot state that any repair work or alteration to the foundation and footings would be required for occupancy. Henke Ex. A. It does state that reroofing would be required. 6. At the time of ,he inspection by Mr. Jacobs, the foundation of the house was visible. 7. On or about May 11, 1982, Mr. Henke entered into a purchase agreement for the subject property. Henke Ex. B. On June 4, 1982, he received a building permit from the City cf Orono, signed by Mr. Jacobs, for the improvements required by Mr. Jacc,s on May 11, 1982. Henke Ex. C. 8. On Julv 21, 1982, Mr. Henke entered into a second purchase agreement for the property, which superseded the previous agreement dated May 11. 1982. The purchase price of the property was approximately $13.000. 9. Sometime after Mr. Henke entered into the second purchase agreement on ',ly 21, i982 and sometime prior to the issuance of the temporary Ce, ficate of Occupancy on February 23, 1983, Mr. Jacobs inspected the sut t property. Mr. Menke told Mr. Jacobs that he no longer intended to occ4_y the structure temporarily and would make 1t h+.s permanent residence. Mr. Jacobs responder .hat, in addition to the renova..ons required on May 11, 1982,,Mr. Henke would be required to install footings and a foundation complying with the requirements cf the Minnesota Uniform Building Code, which has been adopted by reference 1n the City of Orono. UBC §§ 2907(a); 2907(b). 10. On February 23, 19063, a temporary Certificate of Occupancy was issued to Mr. Henke. Henke Ex. G. The temporary Certificate of Occupancy required the installation of footings and a foundation for the structure, in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, to be completed by July 31, 1983, and a reroofing of the structur.e, also in accordance with the Code, to be completed by July 31, 1983. Alth^ugh Mr. Henke signed the temporary Certificate of Occupancy agreeing to make the corrections, his only alternative to signing the document would have been to vacate the premises, where he was then living. 11. The structure at 3536 Lyric Avenue was initially built about 1935 and was, certainly, standing prior to the adoption of any applicable building code by the City of Orono or the State of Minnesota. Henke Ex. E; Henke Ex. F. 12. The support for the house consists of stacked cement' blocks placed at the corners of the structure. City Ex. 4; City Ex. 5. The blocks have no mortar or other fixative as now required by the Uniform Building Code. The weight of the house presses the blocks together, supporting the structure. The cement blocks currently used are not the original support blocks. They have been replaced periodically as needed. 13, There is no evidence in the record that any footings for the structure exter,d down into the frest line as now required by the Uniform Building Code. 14. Since the date of the photographs shoeing the condition of the support for the house, September 21, 1984, the metal I beam shown under a portion of the structure has been removed. It was not required to support the structure but was apparently used as a point of leverage when blocks were required to be replaced. 15. The terrain upon which the blocks rest is unfinished, consisting of loose earth subject to erosion and movement from climatic conditions. City Ex. 4; City Ex. 5. No other structure in the area is supported sol..iy by unmortared, stacked blocks resting on unimproved ground. 16. The improvements made to the interior of the house have placed an additional load on the support structure. 17. In July of 1983, Mr. Hence objected to making the repairs required n the conditional Certificate of Occupancy and refused to install either footings or a foundation as now requires by the Uniform Building Code. 16. On July 19, 1963, City cfficials, including the B,.,'Iding Inspector, met with Mr. Henke at his property and discussed with him . use of a wood foundation and alternative pier footings. Mr. Henke refus, to use any of the less costly alternatives suggested by Mr. Jacobs. 19. on an unspecified date in 1983, after the July 19, 1983 meeting, Mr. Henke was cited for a criminal 0 clation of the ordinances of the City of Orono because of his failure to comply with the temporary Certificate of -3- Occupancy. The City subsequently abandoned the criminal charge and gave Mr. Henke a date for completion of the footings and foundation. 20. In October of 1984, Mr. Henke appeared before the City Council and explained his opposition to installing the required footings and foundation. He asserted that since the structure was standing at the time of the effective date of the ', !form Building Code and the zoning ordinance of the City of Orono, it wa -)re-existing, non -conforming structure, exempt from the footing and fou ation requirements contained in the Code. 21. By Notice of Council Action dated October 19, 1984, the City Council approved an extension of the Certificate of Occupancy until July 23, 1985, conditioned on Mr. Henke installing the new roof and approved footings and foundation for the structure. City Ex. 8. Mr. Henke aahered to his original position that the City could not require him to install the footings and foundation required by the Uniform Building Code. He did not comply with the Notice of Council Action. 22. Ey letter dated February 19, 1985, the City Attorne; for the City of Orono informed Mr. Henke that the City did not accept his position that the footings and foundation could not be required of a pre-existing structure. He was also informed that failure to comply with the Council's action by July 31, 1985, would result in a nullification of the temporary Certifirate of Occupancy, requiring Mr. Henke to vacate the premises. City Ex. 9. Mr. Henke persisted in his refusal to install the footings and foundation. 23. On March 20, 1986, the City filed a criminal action in Hennepin County Municipal Court against Mr. Henke for the asserted violations of the Orono City Ordinances and the Uniform Building Code. City Ex. 7. There is no evidence in the record of the current status of that criminal proceeding. 24. By letter dated September 10, 1986, the Building Inspector informed Mr. Henke that his persistent refusal to install the footings and foundation required by the Uniform Building Code would result in the City revoking his Certificate of Or-upancy, requiring him to vacate the premises. In addition, the City :tated it would initiate a hazardous building action under Minnesota Statutes § 463.16 (1986). City Ex. 10. Mr. Henke was given until September 30, 1986 to request a hearing o,i the revocation of his conditional Certificate of Occupancy. City Ex. 10. 25. By letter dated September 30, 1986, Mr. Henke requested a hearing on the revocation of his conditional Certificate of Occupancy. City Ex. 11. 26. The current structural support for the building, consisting of unmortared, stacked concrete blocks resting on unfinished soil, creates a hazardous condition. The structure might slide because of increased interior weight or a shifting and erosion of the untreated soil from water runoff or other ccnditio.,s. photographs of the structure show that the blocks are already deviating from a straight vertical line. City Ex. 4, City Ex. 5. The condition is dangerous not only to Mr. Henke but also to persons. including children, who might be on the property and possihle subsequent owners cf the property. 27. There is no evidence in the rt:ord that the current condition cf the roof on the structure is dangerous to human life er creates a condition adverse to public herlt cr safe') City Ex. 10- -4- 28. The City may require a Certificate of Occupancy as a prerequisite to occupying a residential structure. UBC § 307(a); Minnesota Rules part 1305.1000 (1985). Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact, the Hearing Officer makes the following: CONCLUSIONS 1. The Orono City Council and the Hearing Officer have subject matter jurisdiction herein. 2. Charles Henke received timely and proper notice of these proceedings. 3. T'ie amity has complied with all substantive and procedural requirements of statute, rule and due process and the matter is properly before the Hearing Officer. 4. The City must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that Mr. Henke has knowingly failed to comply with a cordit:,-, of occupancy that it could legally impose. S. Mr. Henke is not estopped from asserting the invalidity of the occupancy requirements imposed by the City even though he signed the temporary Certificate of Occupancy. 6. The City is not estopped by the conduct of Mr. Jacobs from requiring the abatement of a property condition dangerous to public welfare and safety. 7. The current system of support for the structure, as described in Finding 12, results in a condition which is dangerous to human life. See Finding 26, supra. 8. The provision in the Uniform Building Code exempting pre-existing non -conforming structures from compliance with the Code does not apply tc a pre-existing structure containing a condition dangerous to human life. UBC E 104(c) (1982). 9. As a consequence of Conclusions 5-9, supra, the City has established by a preponderance of the evidence that Mr. Henke has knowingly famed to comply with the footings and foundation requirement of his temporary Certificate of Occupancy, a condition it could legally impose. 10. The City has not established by a preponderance of the evidence that the current status of the roof on .:he structure creates a condition adverse to the public health or safety. 11. Mr. Henke may not continue to occupy the structure in the absence of a valid Certificate of Occupancy. See Finding 28, supra. 12. Any Finding of Fact more properly termed a Conclusion, or any Conclusion more properly termed a Finding of Fact is hereby expressly adopted as such. -5- Rased upon the foregoing Conclusions, the Hearing Officer makes the following: RECOMMENDATION It is the recommendation of the Hearing Officer to the City of Orono that it declare the conditional Certificate of Occupancy issued to Charles Henke void and require the vacation of the structure unle— , within thirty (30) days from the date of its Jrder, Mr. Henke secures the oval of the Building Official for a systen, of support for the structure • 'ch complies with Chapter 29 of the Uniform Building Code and completes the installation of that system within ninety (90) days of the date of its Order. The system of s,p�ort for th structure required by the Building Official should be the least costly alternativ, which is consistent with the value of the structure and t`,e requirements o` ;hapter 29 of the Uniform Building Code. Dated th , s: l relay of 1 1987 . -BRUCE- D. CAMPBELL Administrative Law Judge NOT ICE It is respectfully requested that the City Council provide the Hearing Officer with a copy of its decision herein. Reported: Tape recorded. MEMORANDUM The City seeks to require Mr. Henke to vacate the structure at 3536 Lyric Avenue for an asserted violation of the temporary Certificate of Occupancy, issued on February 23, 1983. That certificate required the installation of footings and a foundation in accordance with Chapter 29 of the Uniform Building Code and repair of the roof. Mr. Henke did sign the temporary Certificate of Occupancy, agreeing to make the modifications to the structure. See Finding 10, supra. Mr. Henke, however, asserts that the requirements are invalid and his agreement was obtaired under duress. Mr. Henke also relies on two separate grounds for refusing to install the required footings and foundation: :he status of the structure as a pre-existing, non -conforming structure; and estoppel against the City. It cannot be seriously contended that Mr. Henke voluntarily agreed to install the requisite footings and foundation so as to prohibit him from now co^testing t;iat requirement. A party is not estopped to attack an action or transaction of a municipality when that party was entitled to the benefits received as a matter of right and regardless of the action or transaction in question. O'Hara v. City of South Fort Mitchell, 290 S.W.2d 455 (Ky. 1956), Gulf C G S Fry Co. v. Wnite, 281 S.W.2d 441 (Tex. Civ. App. 1955). If the City could not legally require Mr. Henke to conform to the foctinys and foundation requirement of Chapter 29 of the Uniform Building Code, he was -6- entitled to the Cer►,ficate of Occupancy received a, a matter of right. The City could not impose unauthorized coniitions on that occupancy and require acceptance or vacation of the premises. Nor is there any element of detrimental reliance on the part of the City which would, in any way, give rise to an estoppel against Mr. Henke. Lovell v. City of Kearney, 200 Neb. 478, 263 N.W.2d 867, 868 (1978). Hence, Mr. Henke is not estopped from challenging the right of the pity to require ti.- installation of conforming footings and foundation at the subject property. See State ex rel. Democrat Printing Co. v. Schmiece, 18 Wis.2d 325, 118 N.W.2d 845, 851 (1963). Throughout his dealings with the City, Mr. Henke has asserted that the structure is a pre-existing, non -conforming structure to which the provisions of the Uniform Building Code, adopted by reference to Orono, have no application. It is clear that the structure in question was built before the effective date of the Orono ordinance adopting the Uniform Building Code and, in fact, prior to the formulation of the Code. Mr. Henke relies on section 104(b) of the Code which states that an alteration or repair to a structure may be made without requiring the existing building to comply with the Code as long as the additional alteration or repair does conform to the Code. Section 104(c) of the Code, however, provides: Buildings in existence at the time of the adoption of this Code may have their existing use or occupancy continued, if such use or occupancy was legal at the time of the adoption of this Code, provided such continued use is not dangerous to life. Hence, while an existing building need not automatically be brought up to all of the standards of the Uriform Building Code when construction, alteration or repair takes place, no condition may be perpetuated which is "dangerous to life', even if the structure was in existence at the time of the adoption of the Code. The Administrative Law Judge need not decide whether the unmortared block support structure for the house was appropriate when the structure was built in 1935; he need only decide whether the existing condition constitotts a danger to human life. The Administrative Law Judge does note, however, that no other structure in the area has a similar methc: of support. The Building Official testified that the unsecured support system did create a condition dangerous to human life. The photc_;raphs of the support system for the structure, City Exhibits 4 and 5, show that the blocks are currently deviating from a straight horizontal line and that the ground cn which the support rests is sloping, unfinished and subject to erosion f,°(,.m water runoff and other climactic conditions. If the house left the blocks serious injury or death could result. The condition could affect not only Mr. Henke but any occupant of the house and children who might play under the structure. Mr. Henke offered no testiR►ony to contest the expert opinion of the Building Official, except to state that the structure has stood since 1935. The photographs, however, show that the blocks are not original. It is entirely possible that the house has c:)me off the support blocks in tie past. Mr. Jacobs had requested that Mr. Henke prc�vlde a statement from a structural engineer that the support system did not create a dangerous condition. Mr. Henke did not do so, assertedly because of cost considerations. Given the status of the record, the Administrative law Judge can only conclude that the current support system for the structure does create a condition dangerous to human life. Under such circumstances, section 104(c) of the Uniform Building Code authorizes the City to require the abatement of the dangerous condition. Finally, Mr. Henke claims an estoppel against the City. He asserts that Mr. Jacobs was asked to provide a list of improvements necessary and that he relied on that list in deciding to purchase the property. Since the list did not include footings and a foundation and he purchased the property subsequent to receiving the list, Mr. Henke argues that the City is now estopped from imposing additional requirements. In Brown v. Minnesota Department of Public Welfare, 368 y.W.2d 906, 910 (Minn. 1985), the Minnesota Supreme Court summarized the law of govern,nent estoppel as follows: To establish a claim of estoppel, plaintiff must prove th2. defendant made representations or inducements, upon which plaintiff reasonably relied, and that plaintiff will be harmed if the claim of estoppel is not allowed. Northern Petrochemical Co. v. United States Fire Insurance Co., 277 N.W.2d 408, 410 (Minn. 1979). The government may be estopped if justice requires, but this court has said it does not "envision that estoppel will be freely applied against the government." To estop a government agency, some element of fault or wrongful conduct must be shown. A plaintiff seeking to estop a government agency has a heavy burden of proof. When deciding whether estoppel will be applied against the government, the court will weigh the public interest frustrated by the estoppel against the equities of the case. Initially, to establish estoppel, Mr. H--nke must show an inducement to an action based on some element of fault or wrongful conduct by the government. The Administrative Law Judge does not find that the action of the Building Official in not initially requiring conforming footings and a foundation constitutes such wrongful conduct. Mr. Henke had told Mr. Jacobs that he only wished to remain in the property for a snort period of time while a new dwelling was being constructed. Under such circumstances, the Building Official did not require the additional footings and foundation. When it became apparent that Mr. Henke intended to reside in the structure permanently and, perheps, at some later date, transfer the property to other persons; the Building Official required strict compliance witti the Uniform Building Code. It was the representation of Mr. Henke and not any wrongful conduct by the Building Official whicti accounts for the initial inspection report excluding i,m:roved footings and a foundation. Under such circumstances, no estoppel lies. Armtrewste, v. Stanton-Pilger Drainage District, 169 Neb. 594, 100 N.W.2d 781, 792-793 (1960), Jvisen v. Omaha Public Power District, 159 Neb. 277, 66 N.W.2d 591, 598 (1958). Even assuming, however, that the Building Official negligently induced detrimental reliance by Mr. Henke, the balancing of harm test previously stated precludes estoppel. In fetermining w~tether conduct on the cart cf a municipal offic'al creates an estopei, it is necessary to balance the asserted harm to the person asserting the estoppel against the public in, ` frustrated if estoppel is foun6. Mesaba Aviation v.�County of Itasca, 2 N.W.2d 877, 880 (Minn. 1977). Here, the public interest frustrated is the protection of the public safety. The Administrative Law Judge has determined that the existing condition is dangerous to human life. That danger affects Mr. Henke, any other occupants of the premises including successors in title and children who may play under the house. Weighing the cost to Mr. Henke of installing suitable footings and a foundation against the danger to human life, the balance is struck in favor of the public interest. Brown v. Dept. of ^ublic Welfare, 368 N.W.2d 906, 912-913 (Minn. 1985). The temporary Certificate of Occupancy also required Mr. Henke to improve the roof on the structure. The only evidence presented at the hearing regarding the current :ondition of the roof was that it had more layers of old roofing mateT'ial than was allowed by the Code. City Ex. 10. There is no evidence in the record as to whether that condition predates the effective date of the Code. There is no evidence in the record that the current condition of the roof poses a danger to human health or safety. Under such circumstances, the City has not borne its burden of proof that Mr. Henke may be required to alter the condition of the roof prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy. Although the City asserts in its Brief that the roof leaks badly, since that statement was not made at the hearing, it is not considered ty the Administrative Law Judge. Although the Administrative Law Judge has foun,' that Mr. Henke may be required to install footings and a •)undation in accordance with Chapter 29 of the Uniform Building Code, it is suggested that the Building Official and Mr. Henke agree on the least costly method of compliance. In formulating the least costly method of compliance, the Building Official should consider the age and value of the structure. B.D.C. ysy�� I It -147v4ly��;az:i/ An C'ti/ ( •�'Gl�f.,!l �t /7 �� •�1litiC .,f':�-fZ`L�i��yyiZ�Lps�/lL�kf/ w � � ���° ✓C^� �'-r'I,1�t���� Jam. ,�--���:%�� ���% ��u� `> �2`Zl�'-/l7L�Q�-�.� �i G'.%-f C^.l�Z �t�� �,�,�il�yt.P �I•� �� .fin-C%�' .��i�-�. =��Y-u � �z�'� •n� ,00c/ . �' -�� �� �r✓' _ /,,to/o,�� 7r ti!'�a�v 0 52087.4 N1AY 2 ; 1987 TO: Mayor and City Council, FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: May 20, 1987 SUBJECT: Charles Henke, 3536 Lyric Avenue - Passage of hazardous Buildings Proceedings Attachments: A. hazardous Buildings Proceedings - Adopted B. Proposed Hazardous Buildings Proceedings Resolution ISSUE - Commencement of hazardous buildings proceedings to correct deficiencies in the structure at 3536 Lyric Avenue. INTRODUCTION - The proposed reason as noted above for revocation of temporary certificate of occupancy is the initial unsoundness of the current foundation among other things. As noted in Attachment A the City did originally commence hazardous buildings proceedings on this matter back on October 13, 1985. These however have not gore forward as it h.As become a matter of due process about the issue of the temporary certificate of occupancy. DISCUSSION - Based on the rational for revocation of the temporary certificate of occupancy together with the legal advise because of the dated nature of the previous `.azardous buildings proceedings that Attachement B be adopted. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconder, by to adopt resolution number _ commencing hazardous buildings proceedings against the property at 3536 I.,yric Avenue. Ayes , Nays ` City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL *. . WORK NO. _ MAY 2 U i88 i A RESOLUTION ORDERING REVOCATION OF TEt4PORARY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY OF HAZARDOUS BUILDING AT 3536 LYRIC AVENUE, ORONO WLIEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Richard Bowman Gilmore, Mary Ellen Anthony and Audry S. Gilmore are the owners of record and Charles Lewis Henke has an interest in the property located at 3536 Lyric Avenue, Orono, Minnesota. herein referred to as "the property", and legally described as follows: Lots 19 & 20, Block 4, "Navarre Heights", Hennepin County, Minnesota (P.I.D. 17-117-23 43 0056); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono, having duly considered the matter pursuant to Minnesota State Building Code 1305.1000 Section 307 (a), hereby finds that the above described property is uninhabitable and contains hazardous conditions which constitute a public nuisance and which makes this property hazardous to the public health, safety and welfare based on the following findings: 1. Improper footings - concrete blocks stacked without mortar in joints - improper depth. 2. Building is in a state of deterioration and dilapidation, thus it is a safety and health hazard pursuant to Minnesota State B--i lding Code/Uniform Building Code, Sect.Lon 203. 3. Orders to remove or repair the structure were issued by the Building Official on September 24, 1.982, February 23, 1983, July 19, 1983, February 19, 1985 and Septembei 10, 1986. These orders have not been complied with. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: 1. That the City Council of the City of Orono, pursuant to Minnesota State Building Code/Uniform Buildinq Code Section 307 (f) hereby orders the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy revoked. 2. The City Counci 1 of the City of Orono, pursuant to the foregoing findings and in accordance w,th Minnesota State ruildinq Code/Uniform Buildinq Code 1305.1000 Section 307 (,-) hereby orders the owner(s) of thy, propf-r-ty to vac.atc, the building ()n or befure� June 15, 1987. I',ao l r�f 2 0 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3. That the City Council of the City of Orono, pursuant to State Statute 463.251, hereby orders the owner(s) to board -up and secure the structure within ten (10) days. The City Council further orders that unless corrective action is taken within ten (10) days from the date of service of this order, it will result in the City properly securing the building and the cost thereof will be charged against the real estate as provided in State Statute Section 463.21. 4. The City Council of the City of Orono, pursuant to foregoing findings and in acc,.-xdance with Minnesota State Statutes Sections 463.15 to 463.261 will commence Hazardous Building 'fiction. 5. That the City Council of the City of Orono hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor, City Clerk, City Attorney, and other officers and employees of the City to take such action, prepare, sign and serve such papers as are necessary to comply with this order and to asses the cost thereof against the real estate described above for collection along with taxes. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, ,'Minnesota, this 26th day of May, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk APPROVED: .James R. Grabek, Mayor 52087.1 TO: Mayor and City Council 3 1987 FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrato`NOW DATE: May 20, 1987 SUBJECT: Cici Property - 875 Wayzata Boulevard - Water Connection Attachment: A. Cici Request Date January 29, 1.987 B. Long Lake Letter of Intent - February 1987 ISSUE - Whether the Council will permit hookup of the Cici property to the Long Lake water system. INTRODUCTION - As you recall the Cici property was granted a conditional use permit to construct a Day Care Center at the juncture of Highway 12 and the Luce Line. Because of the building code requirements this piece of property does require that it be sprinkl i because of the nature of the occupancy. As a result of this e Cici's determined that cost to put in their own domestic well supply together with a well large enough to support the sprinkler system together with a septic system would cost $50,000 more than if they were able to hookup to municipal sewer and water. Because of the joint request and the need for sewer request to be part of a Comprehensive Plan amendment this was incorporated as part of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment #2 regarding the Highway 12 corridor study. DISCUSSION - Because the Comprehensive Plan amendment has taken longer than originally anticipated together with the fact that the water service in and of itself is the primary issue regarding cost and that this in and of itself does not require a Comprehensive Plar amendment this issue is brought forward to you at this time independently of the Comprehensive Plan amendment. It is the Cici's intent that they would be able to commence construction once the water system corncection is approved and all the easements are obtain?d. They would provide in their building plans that they would either be able to connect to a septic system or a sewer system connection depending on the timing of the Comprehensive Plan amendment and what approvals would take place in regard to that. RF.COMMF.NDATION - It is staff's recommendation that the issue of water —lookup -be handled separately from the Comp Plan amendment and that in this case it he approved to provide i cost effective solution to provide appropriate built in fire protection for the Day Care Center. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by , for the Council to authorize the hookup of the property at 875 Wayzata Boulevard, Day Care Center to municipal water system of Long Lake and direct staff to undertake any appropriate negotiations to allow that to happen. Ayes Nays cc: Mrs. Ingabord Cici Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator John Gerhardson, Public Works Coordinator City of Long Lake 52087.5 C323 TO: Mayor and City Council MAY P, ^ lc FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City AdministratorNt DATE: May 20, 1987 SUBJECT: Budget Education Meeting ISSUE - Establishment of a preparatory educational meeting for Councilmembers regarding the budget process. INTRODUCTION - Given the fact that most of the Councilmembers have�not been through a budget process before it was felt appropriate to establish an opportunity by which members could become fami 1 = gar with the budget process and how it is gone about by doing a budget review of the current 1987 Budget. It is hoped that this opportunity would allow people to become more familiar with the budget so that when tee actual budget considerations are undertaken that they have a better idea of the overall process. DISCUSSION - Looking at the schedule it is suggested that the dates of either Tuesday, July 7, 1987 or Tuesday, July 21, 1987 be possible dates for this budget education. It is anticipated that the overall revenue review together with department by department budgets would take approximately an hour and a half to two hours. Additionally Councilmembers would be encouraged to either discuss individual questions with the staff either before or after that meeting at their convenience. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by , to establish as the special budn-t e -i tion meeting for interested Councilmembers in preparation of the 1988 budget process. Ayes Nays c Depa r t me: t 52187. 3 TO: Mayor and City Council L1 FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: May 21, 1987 SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendment - Firearms Discharging Attachments: A. Kilbo Memo dated 5/21/87 B. Proposed Ordinance Amendment ISSUE - Adoption of an ordinance amendment to: R, ICETING 2 G 1587 7 ► �QNO A.) Allow discharge permits of firearms for periods of longer than 15 days to eliminate pests where no other means of control are appropriate. B.) Allowing the use of bow and arrow hunting in season for game animals for periods .longer than 15 days. INTRODUCTION - In the past the City has issued firearms permits to individuals for periods longer than 15 days. With a recent ordinance amendment this practice ceased. This has resulted in situations in the rural areas wh,;re such control needs to be as long as the growing season. In addition the City did last year begin to allow use of bow and arrow to control. problems such as deer during the appropraite season. Again the 15 day limit be-ame problematic. DISCUSSION The Chief of Police as noted feels there are circumstances where it is appropriate to issue these permits for up to 120 days -,s -lemon: trated by the problem presented for control of pests. Given that the brew and ari is initiated last fall for nusiance control that such she ild a,. flow for the longer permit. The Pol ice felt that tF e use, of and arrow did not present a problem last j4-ir and that it appropriate to allow the discretion up to th � length of thr, -ison. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended th it the ordinance be amended to alow permits: to be issued for up to 12A days iependent on the situation (th( costs involved of a 15 day permit are not dissimilar in nature ^f those proposed up to 124 (lays) and that the bow and arrow license issuance be extended up to the length of the season. PROPOSED MOTION - Move(+ by , seconded by , the Orono City Council adopt Ordinance Number , Second Serfs as an amendment to Ordinance Number 9.16 to allow for extended occasional permits for pest control when other control means are not appropriate. Ayes _, Nays _ INTEROFFICE MEMO DATE: May 21, 1,987 TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Mel Kilbo, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Revision of Limited Firearms Permit I have received numerous requests to allow longer times for limited permits. I have received requests for pest control on a 68 acre farm which owner plants corn and has geese and sheep on his farm. Fie has been having trouble with pest and predators for many years and has had in the oast an annual nermit with no complaints. I believe because of our rural area, the City Council could make allowar;ce to give more than 15 days for a permit. I also have a request from a citizen that takes care of protected animals under federal 1,!w and has problems with skunks, rats, and muskrats. This person is next to a 3/4 acre field and shoots predators only as needed. He has had a permit under previous ordinance without complaint. ORDINANCE NUMBER , SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 9.10 AND ENTITLED "DANGEROUS WEAPONS AND ARTICLES". The City Council of the City of Orono ordains: Ordinance Number 9.10 and entitled "Dangerous Weapons and Articles" is amended to read: Subdivision 7.A. Permits, Occasional. Occasional permits valid for a period of fifteen (15) days or less may be granted to clubs or persons as follows: ' 1. Occasional target shooting or trap and skeet shooting; 2. Field trials, commercial or professional exhibitions or displays, or any similar or lawful purpose as determined by the City Clerk. Subdivision 7.B. Permits, Commercial or Agricultural. Commercial or agricultural permits may be granted up to a maximum of 120 days as established by the Administrator to parsons or clubs meeting all the following criteria: A. For control of pests, vermir -odents, or other animal nuisances, such as deer hunting by be Arid arrow during appropriate season, or other animals that are a demonstrated nuisance. B. Where there are no other appropriate --hods available. C. Where there is j demonstrated need for a longer duration of time for predator control such as a bow and arrow (.,-er seasc:i or growing season in agricultural situations. Subcivision 7.C. occasic;:ial permits valid for a period under or 7B as deemed appropriate may be grantee? to cl ,bs or persons as follows: A. The discharge of bow and arrow will be allowed on an occasional basis to remove problematic animals including game anima's when an individual hunter has obtained a permit issued by the Chief of Police subject to the fol lowing circumstances: 1. There is a demonstrated nuisance of that animal to that property owner. 2. Property owner has specifically given written permission to a hunter and that hunter has the appropriate state hunting permit. 1. Th3t no discharging be done within la• feet of any property line, within lile feet of any bui ldinys 2 and 200 feet of any livestock. 4. Discharge for purposes of this section shall only be done from an elevated stand th-it is a minimum of four (4) feet off the ground. 5. Can only be done during the appropriate season. 6. The hunter receives no compensation for the removal service apart for the tention of animals killed. This ordinance Fhall be effective upon adoption and publication. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held the 26th day of May, 1987. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk DATE: May 13, 1987 . ri MEETING TO: Mark Bernhardson, Citv Administrator Y ' u 1987 FROM: Mel Kilbo Chief of Police DRUM SUBJECT: Request for additional temporary help As I talked to you earlier, the earlv snrinn has a"'fected the case load of the police department. Statistics are: Mav 4, Monday 88 ICn's 7 tapes 90 phone calls 5, -uesdav 1.9 3 48 f , Ilednesdav 15 0 58 7, Thursdav 2� 3 53 8, Fridav 27 2 39 April 27, Mondav 93 11 101 18, Tuesd.av 22 d_ 47 :9, tIerinesrlav o`fice closer, most of dav, not counted Mav 11 . i '' 31 The statistics listed above are one indication of the early case load. Both Sue and Carol, in addition to their normal clerical work, answer all phone calls and handle the walk=in traffic as well. Also, the officers on the street use channel 2 on an increasingl basis, again drawing the secretaries time from routine tasks. Also included are attorney reauests that come in by mail or phone that also are increasing as a result of the early case load. I have attached a memo from Sue with further data. I reouest permission to hire, on a temporary basis, Mrs. Jean HooGenakker to work primarily on Sundav afternoons and evenings, processing the dictation tapes, filinct and computer entry, also other tasks as assioned. I would anticipate no more than 6 hours a week for a period of 3k, Months plus 2A hours ad- ditional in the week that Sue takes vacation, for a total of approx- imately 140 hours. I renuest that she Le paid at the rate of $6.00 per hour on a voucher basis, with no benefits. 70: Mayor and City Council 'J fwO11: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator' i ISSUE - Employment of a temporary person to assist the police department c er rally. INTRODUCTION - With the increased clerical work load for the summer coupled with t e general upswing in police activity there has become a need for more clerical assistance in specifically typing. DISCUSSION - The temporary position would be on an as needed basis not to exceed 40 hours in 126 days. At this point it would terminate 15 September 1987. The cost would be under $1,000. An alternative would be overtime for current personnel who are not that interested because of time need. Because of the limited nature of the job and the requirements principally for weekend work staff would recommend employing Jean foogenakker who has previously worked for the City and has indicated a willingness to so do. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by , to authorize the employment of Jean Hoogenakker at $6.00 per hour effective 27 May 1987 to work no more than 140 hours in a period whose term ends 15 September 1987. Ayes Nays n- TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: John Gerhardson, Public Works Coordinator DATE: May 20 , 1987�''�'; - SUBJ: Reject Bids - Utility Tractor & Mower - Parks Department On May 15, 1987 the City of Orono opened bids for one new utility tractor and mower for the Park Maintenance Department. We have reviewed the bids and have determined that the specification for the cab of the low bidder does not meet our nee-'s . Th.refore, it is recommended that all bids be rejected. We will revise our specification and advertise again with a bid opening in June 1.987. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval.. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by !-_, that the City Council reject all bids for utility tractor and that staff be directed to rebid for the item that is a 1987 Budget item. Ayes ___, Nays __ 5187.2 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator p DATE: May 21, 1987 SUII,ECT: Police Officer Employment - Authority to Hire 2 3 1987 ISSUE - Council granting authority to the City Administrator to hire a patrol officer which will be confirmed at a subsequent meeting. INTRODUCTION - The City is needing to hire a replacement for Peter Bydzovsky. (While the City was going to employ Mr. Bydzovsky part-time during the month of May his new employer decided that they would not approve of such work subsequent to our last meeting and therefore have been short of personnel this month. In addition Mike Kirnyczyk remains out with a broken ankle and Mark Thomton just injured his knee and will be out at ].east 4 weeks more.) DISCUSSION - Once the City initiated the hiring process they received applications from the Minnesota Police Recruitment System and had prel iminary intery iews with six indiv idua ls. Based on those interviews five were interviewed by a panel composed of an Orono Police Officer, a representative f:om r,ong Lake and Len Harrel 1, Chief of Pol ice in Mound. Based on the•ae interviews the Chief of Police and City Administrator interviewed two ,�f the six. The top two are as follows: Michael_Murphy - Mr. Murphy has been a Corporal in Wayzata F_or the past 3 years. Prior to that he was employed as a Hennepin County Deputy. Ile presently is actively involved in both patrol and investigative work including drug enforcement and retail business related crime. Dan Fischenich - Mr. Fischenich has been a Patrol Dfficer fnr_the past ten years with the last 7 years being with the 6 member LeSueur Police Department. He has boen involved in the range of situations incountered in a rural. community of 2500 together with serving as a member -)f the rescue squad. Present 1v thr City is awaiting teat results (medical) on the sand i(iat wh irh shou ld t%n av'-1 i ) abl the week of 5,/26 (Ps ychoIn'licaIr- a r r, compl(Ito). At this point hoth candidates appear to F> cool choic° s> as P._ttrol ()ffirer. REC0MMf'NDATI0N - ?t. i ", r!,Ommr,ndcd that th(� Council authorize the City Administrator to make an employment offer to Michael Murphy as the top candidate conditioned upon successfully completing the required physical and phychological testing. This employment will be effective commencing June 15, 198-7. If he either does not qualify or rejects the offer permission is requested to make an employment offer to Mr. Fischenich subject to the same conditions. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , that the City Council authorize the City Administrator to hire Michael Murphy upon the successful completion of the required physical and phychological tests effective 15 June 1987 to be confirmed at a subsequent meeting. As an alternative authority is granteu �o employ Mr. Fischenich subject to the same conditions. Ayes `, Nays 52187.1 1 r 1 TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Tom Kuehn, Finan,e Director ��2L({! DATE: May 21, 1987 SUBJECT: Wayzata Firn Agreement Extension - 1987 We have received the extension of the agreement for the provision of fire protection service to that portion of Orono sey.vcd by the City of Wayzata. We are to execute and return twc copies to Wayzata. The cost of the service for 1987 is S4,300 c3mpared to the budget estimate for 1987 of $10,000. The decrease is due to f,-wer calls during the three year base period June 1, 1983, through May 31, 1986 (20 vs 32 last contract base period) and a decrease in the Wayzata fire budget of $ 18, 250 due to the final payment of a fire equipment bond issue. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator., Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by that the City Council approve extension of the Wayzata _, fire service contract for 1987, in the amount of $4,300. eyes , Nays CITY OF WA YZA TA bon RICE ;:TFgFET, NVAYZATA. MINN. 55391 PH -,')NE 173-0234 May 8, 1987 Mr. Tom Kuehn City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mr. Kuehn: Enclosed are four copies of a proposed extension of the agreement between Wayzata and Orono for the ;rovision of fire service to a portion of Orono this year. If acceptable, please execute two copies of this Agreement and return them to me for our files. You will note that the annual charge for fire service this year is $4,300. As in the past, t%is charge is based upon the percentage of calls in Orono for the preceding three-year period. Following is a breakdown of calls from June 1, 1983 to May 31, 1986: Calls in Calls in Total Orono Wayzata Calls June 1, 1983 - May 31, 1984 9 95 104 June 1, 1984 - May 31, 1985 4 81 85 Jiine 1, 1985 - May 31., 1986 7 91 98 20 (7%) 267 (93%) 287 Following is a summary of budgeted Fire Department expenses for 1987.and the net amount of such expenses chargeable to Orono: 1987 Operating; budget less Fire Relief Association payment $50,100 1981 Equipment Bond -Fire Truck (417) 11,644 $61 , 744 x 7'. _ $4, 3(x) Also enclosed is a bill for the first half of this ye 's fire protection service. Plc -as e feel free to contact me 1f you have .iny questions. 5incereIy, ri Russell i Van GompeI i Finances J);roctor EXTENSION OF AGREEMENT The CITY OF WAYZATA and the CITY OF ORONO, on this day of 19 , do hereby agree to extend for another full year their previous Agreement, dated April 19, 1977, whereby Orono purchased from Wayzata fire protection services. In consideration of such extension, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The terms of said previous Agreement shall expire at one minute before midnight, December 31, 1986, unless further extended prior to that date by mucval agreement. 2. Orono shall pay to Wayzata the sum of $ 4,300 for fire protection rendered during this additional period, payment of which may be made on a quarterly basis. IN WITNESS WHEREO'r, the parties hereto have executed this Extension of Agreement the day and year first above written. CITY OF WAYZATA Y Mayor And City :r CITY OF ORONO By _ Mayor And Cie-k- Administrator 52187.2 J � TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrate+ k DATE: May 21, 1987 SUBJECT: Administrator's Information !J F � Ac COUNTY ROAD 116 - At the Medina City Council meeting held on Tuesday, May 19, 1987 the Med'_na City Council on a 4 to 1 vote decided to request from Hennepin County that they construct County 11.6 south of its termination at Highway 55 on somewhat of a diagonal line down to County 24 and then south on Willow. Since the County has indicated that they wo�al.d not construct it unless it went to Highway 12 it now requires that the Orono City Council consider the matter.. The staff will be establishing a public hearing on the matter and notifying abutting property owners for the July 13, 1987 Council meeting. In the interirr the City will be discussing the matter further with Hennepin County to ascertain requirements and benefits that will be involved in the matter being constructed into Orono. MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHFD DISTRICT MELTING 5/28/187 - Council- mem,bers an - s_aTT_havn been Invitec3-to attend a meetinq at the Minnetonka Country Club in Shorewood for presentation by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Engineers and Commissioners. The luncheon meeting is `.o commence at 11:30. MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORF SALE - The lease agreement between Mr. Dick Keaveeny and Mr. Steve Corl is being signed and the closing of the liquor store sale is proceeding on schedule. The City will be closing the st,)re at 103:001 P.M. on Saturday, May 30th and an inventory will he conducted by both parties on Sunday, May 31st. The c103ing will take first thing on Monday, ,Tune 1st and as the inventory i.; agreed to and the closing documents are signed Mr. Cor1 will br, thf.., own,.>r anal will commence hu�;iness. 3965 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - The City has filed the appropriate documents with the court and is currently attempting to yet the trial date set so the matter can heard. 200 HOLLANDER ROAD - As noted in the attached letter the attorney or the estate as committed to get the barns de- ` ished as soon as practical by the Wayzata Fire Department. Boti. are to be done at the same time, and that the foundations wil 1 be leveled and lan&,caped within 30 days of the f ire department's disposing of the buildings. As noted the access to Sixth Avenue will be closed off when the landscaping work is done around the barns. The City is st i 1 1 trying to get the garbage cleaned up and there iL a request from the owner to al low for construction of a new garage. This matter is currently be -ng discussed between the estate and City staff. The City has continued with the hazardous bui.ldirg pr ,eedings and the hearing daf-' w) -) on Thursday, May 28, 1987. The City 1-tends to CGtiF,..att the hearing and have the order in hand in orde, _o maintain 1pverage over the estate. CITY MANANG::R- SPRING COMFFRENCE - As noted previously the Ma ageTFs- Conte. once was ie_T_aM:'t Cravens which, commenced on Wed!icsday, May 1 3th and co-; lu�led on Friday, the 1 5th. = h i l e miss'_ng the first session on Wednesday event iq because of t. Board of Raview was able to attend some excellent sessions put or the conference tiat related to leads • -hip and the various "spects that go into . at toyether witi in 'nteresting Friday session on leadership and ethics. I appi:._ci_z: the opportunity to att - id and will by oking forward to incorporating this learning into the City gani zation. MNDOT MEETING HIGHWAY 12 - The )rcno Cite ,taff t,:>gether with the Long Lake Mayor met with Paul Keranin, i engin -er with MnDot. T !e meetir,-- isisted of discussion, recjaidin . irrent capacities to ;-iighway and brain storming as to iueas � .ar -hc imprc. r traffic flow in the current right-of-way, I .. .n to find wf, .t the vo _,,me- possibi' ity would be with suct iq, ovements, the possibi iities there were for expanding rig -of-way in the e, isting corridor and iddi tion� l ly look at al.t rnate routes b..>th short and long segments that at, available that are presently in the corridor. This meeting proved to he c of an information gathering meeting on she part of MnDot t, .00k a problems and rossibilities to develop their opinions as to what i_ tech ,ically f.e3_iblP. Staff will keep you pc,,:ted on any iurth.er dev-loprrier:'- fnvu we havca ad� ,pate infori -itio. rng,rdinr ,;-)terl-ial ectic IRE OL L T.NORSON WIN:.•'( L -UNSON CLAY R MOOR[ L ONN)R 1, SCHMID VAL M NIOO. E LOPCNS 0. 9.11,LSTAD SIONE- .^PLAN WOOOB URY N ANDR[WS GCONG( R. A JOMN SON •NOREw R. CLARK F RAN- R A. OVOAK R06 I.11, VOLD MAR. NGDER N, RIL KORSM C N^f ^r,ITC MAP. 'CIOTT TIMO, 1LY 6NAN( I. � .[I[RSON aLCNN R D`JRY RCINERT A .(( JAMES T. SWENSON CR1C O. MAC 60N STCC..EN r.+u INN[LL 1AICNAEL G "S., lLTCPNCn � I:CY MAC KALL, CROU NS E �- LAW OFFr-.6173 1400 T C r Ii 1 SOUTH EICh H MIN"7F:APOLIS, MINNTCLEPIMONC " 2T(LCCOPIER + May 12, 1987 Mr. Roger Holland%ir 1776 Dupont Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55403 Mr. John Hcllander 200 Hollander Road Wayzata, MN 55391 PC: EstF ' of Hildur Fol ie rider Our i : le No. 4755 Dear Roger and Join: MOORE STC -MAN[[ J. PRCM JOHN R, WMCATON TIIAOTNT M, GARNE-T IMARI K. MCINS[RIING DONNA M. WATS JCAN M, NANSKC MAR♦ LTNN JANNK( J �I� TNOM^S C, POwCR / TNOMA6 J. LALLICR ( 'SUSAN M. SWIFT : OWARO J. C U MMINGS CINDY J. LARSON MARK A. RURIK VILIS III INOC OF COUNSCL rLOYO C. NELSON JAMES 6. NANNAN HENRY C. MACKALL 0665-I1176) R06C PT M. CROUN6( (1663-1671) PERRY R. MOORC (1664-1666) I spoke with Mark Btrnhardsun of the City of Oronu relative tI, response to the city's letter to me addressing the Needs tc Ir the nrr• »t ate. In connection therewith, Mark and I discussed he tteTT1-. We 1, that the gas ank c 'uhn's property would be removed wits. 0 days. Therefore, I onfJrmed that the gas tank would be •r;noverl from the property by June 4. T .:ity at,- _ne noighbor, are mo: concerned about the pile up garbaye and garbdoe l,I.:s on the property. We acknowledged that Uv,re is a problem with racooi. breaking into the garbage and r:trewi-:g the garhagr, -,bout the ; •operty. The city has also adv.isl d Ins that the al3o prese-r a health haza- .j The:-t f-Jre, arr;,yigl,m .t: t be made i ,media _.ely to 1+a Ye the garbarje rem,�vt.0 .,Id tc ALdP for c(->nt inu -(g removal or profession-.i1 cirl; (j}) ct--rbage on a r g.iltir basi.�,. The two cf you MIv.'t ._erd to th' ar_.-'-irdin j .- the city. ;hirri, thF_ i' u s ._ tt:at those t)uilci w' ic. i 4il1. be hurned i)e hu -nE d 3r t'w `,ame * i) / They -,re I : ,, rnecl t", t it inay be Jiff it-u.lt to control the spread cif the iii. . If Ltiere is propf -ty ma.inta ine.1 in the barns the city ?I:"> requested that `}' prope.ty he �_ 1as:e 19 t I� ;i,:;rr:ri : y in tho garane attached to y 4,CKALL, CP0L!NS E a M(D0V� L May 12, 1987 Page 2 mother's home. The city : .bviously willing to wait until weather conditions improve to allow the City cf Wayzata to burn the buildings. however, they have also demanded a timeframe after " burning of the buildings in which the foundat=.ons and debris will be removed. We tentatively spoke of a 30 day timPframe after the burning of the nuildings. You should discuss th • directly with lark Ber 2rdson at the City of Orono to work out these details. You must also arrange for an inspection of the small rental unit on the property which must be vacated. 1 understand that the subdivision of the main home from the home John is occupying cannot be approved until this inspection is*made. Likewise you should confer directly with Mark Bcrnhardson relative to this item. Finally, Mark advised me that there is an old Lancia auto parked on the property. He does not believe the same is in operating condition and the city wou_'. like this vehicle removed from, the property as soon as poss_:Jle. This is the first that I have heard of such an automobile. The city thought that this auto may belong to Roger, but I was not able to confirm anything with respect to this matter. Once again, if there is a Lancia c- similar automobile located on the property and the same belc..gs to one of you, would you please make arrangements to comply with the city's request to have the vehicle removed immediately. I advised Mark Bernl.ardson that we hope that a garage may be built'. on John's property very shortly. In connection therewith Marl, asked that the two of you meet with him relative to the placement of the garage on the property pending final approval and subdivision of the two parcels. Tf you have any questions relative to the aforesaid, please let me know. Otherwise, wou'-' you follow-through with Mark Berhardson directly any soon as possible. Very truly yours, "IACKALL, "ROUNSE & MOORE E sx't - M,i - V 1.., rd. ,-)n 9/ MEETING lAy u 1987 LIST OF L'CENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR MEETIN" OF Muy 26, 1987 Septic System Installers: Garbage & Refuse Collector: Quality Sewer and Water 4860 Peony Lane Coppin Plumbing 2300 Chateau ;pane R & W Roll.-Otf Service, Inc, R & W Sanitation, Inc 8470 Galpin Blvd. Solicitor: Blue Bell Ice Cream, Inc. 3218 Snelling Avenue Minneapolis, MN Special Event and One Day Set Up Permit: RESTART, Inc. by Geoffrey W. Elands, Director Date: Saturday, July 11, 1987 5:00 - 10:00 P.M. Location: 2625 North Shore Drive Kirt Woodhouse residence Cigarette License: Navarre Liquors, Inc. 3421 Shoreline Drive June t hru j anuary Crystal tiny, Minnesotu :,r,31:1 SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTALLERS LICENSE APPLICATION BUILDING R ZONING — 473.7357 ASSt•.SSIN(; All questions must be answered. License fee, bond, certificate of insurance, and evidence :)f MPCA Certification or Home Sewage `treatment Workshop attendeitce must accompany this application. All applications are subject to a ten (10) day approval period. 1. Business or trade name i 2. Business address 3. Business phone 4.")-0 7 Residence phone 4. Name of applicant or company xepresenta ive holding MPCA certification G40,V L, R. �..-, f.4 �y 5. Type of certification held: Installer Pumper Site evaluator System designer Is this a Provisional Certificate? Certificate No. Co C1 6. If no Certificate is held, provide evidence of attendance at one of the On -Site Sewage Treatment Workshops held immediately prior to *he current construction season. 7. Have you ever held a Septic System Installer license in Orono before? aX4 Most recent year P. Have you ever had a license revoked? 72c. When? Where? �. Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes_ No SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: 1' 1. $25.00 license application fee. _ 2. $2000.00 license and permit bond nailing City of Orono as obliuee. The State Plumbers BonO will not be accepted. _4 3. $10-50-'_00,000 minimum Certificate of Insurance. 4. Copy of current MPCA Certificate or evidence of attendence at On -Site Sewage Treatment Workshop held immediately prior t,) current construction season. L:CENSL'S WILL 'OT BE PLiOr'ESSED UNTIL, ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED. List uersons other tha:-. a plicant who are authorize(, by you to apr'.1y for permits 1_nder your license The undersigned her, -by makes application to the City of Orono, Vinnosota, for license, to instail and repair septic �tr d/or nu...., ; out septic, tanks, subject to the laws ()f t' l,t.-ate of ;,iinn/,sc,ta .-ind the. Ordi.* anew of the City of Oron(--). App' i. ---ints Sigr;iture Ztc St�af f z< c�mr�cnd.ltior� t\r1,r(,val'j;"f Denial Date f) - J CITY Rc_1s(jn for vial - _ ___i--- ( (7)41. City Council "' ct '-)n D i t.c - — A'-pr ovi'd Denied :Y(,Y I), 1 tt' 1 1 c., t I ..'t' in, 1 1 a f.'d �_ 1 TV CryHlal fin,y, li7inne�nl:, hSal'1 �� �_ 1 ST%11,LI:I2,`'i ION BUTA,SI1NG ZONING - •173.7357 FF6 2 5�► All questions must be answered. License j�er;--bovd--certificate of insurance, and evidence of MPCA Certif.ir.1 r home Sewage Treatment Workshop attendance must accompany this app.:cat3a`n. All applications are subject to a ten (10) day approval period. 1. Business or trade -amn 2. Business address. 2U �, C V-1cA Ir-ct�-� �--'� 1 ') Z:), '`J SS3ia`� 3. Business phone ctResidence phone _ 4. Name of applicant or company representative holding MPCA certification L�tw� Q.��'_ C� (1nt^ 5. Type of certification held: Installer Pumper Site evaluator System designer Is this a Provisional Certificate? t—" Certificate No. 6. If no Certificate is held, provide evidence of attendance at orie of the On -Site Sewage Treatment Workshops held immediatel: prior to the current construction season. 7. Have you ever held a Septic System Installer license in Orono before? a.:5 most recent year 8. Have you ever had a license revoked? " When? Where? 9. Do you do Municidal Sewer hook-ups? Yes L� No SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: 1. $25.00 license application fee. 2. 2000.00 license and per.mit bond naming City of Orono as obligee. The State Plumbers Bond e:ill not be accepted. �. $10-50-100,000 minimum Certificate of Insurance. t n ioat Copy of current MPCA Certificate or evidence of attendence at On -Si to Sc�,,age Treatment Workshop held immediately n pttr prior to current construction season. LICENSES HILL NOT BE PROCE SSE'D UNT7l r1LL ITEMS THE SUBMITTED. List persons other than arr-l.ic-:nt aho ire author}}'��zed by you to apply for permits under your l ict.;sc _ h�ln� 1�, `� C.Q� Q, � The undo r,>irined hereby m.:..kej :!PE it :-.ti.on to the City of Orono, Minn-scta, for i j(_, n.-c t- i°:stc,! , nd repair septic i,nd/or u--- c t. _1..;:s, :)Jt'v+. to the laws of the Statc• of ,•1:.in<< < t a ai-d th, Oi-dinanc,_s of the City of Orono. Date d -X3' i 1 Appl icants ignaturc Staff recommendation A .��� Denial Date CITY pf royal �L— treason for denial: USE City Council Action_ ba_tc _ —Approved Denied ONLY Date license mailed CITY OF ORONO _'' �_ '_ ' � `. `6--� - License Year P.U. B,,,_ 66 ( r Date Received Crystal Bay, Mtn 553 3, i APR _ 91987 Fee Paid tO . J'i Initials 7Z.C, 473-7357 GARB] ESS REFUSE COLLECTOR'S LICENSE APPLICATION The undersigned wishes to operate the indicated business in the City of Orono and herewith makes application for a license to do so. Business/Firm R & 'W Roll -Off Service, Inc. R & W Sanitation, Inc. Address 8470 Galpin Blvd. Chanhassen (Street) (City) (State) (Zip Code) Business Phone Number 474-1813 ' Applicant's Name � Russell W. Leistiko - Address (Stree��t7`+-)�81 (City) (Sta- !-Iip Code) Phone Number 3 Check One: Individual _ Partnership x Corporation Number of Vehicles to be used .in Orono 4 Description of Year-M-f9r.- Y980 Mack - IV 0 �1�4 General vehicles (attached list if more): Loaded Loaded Gross Wt. Rear Axle Wt. Size/Yards License Number —_�0` y 'nh t.e , '�- Mack 5T,000 area of City served d 2Qyd residential and commercial Schedule of Coll^ction charges/ dates ApproximAt.e number of customers in Orono varies by account. Location dumping area Louisville Landfill, Jordan Mid --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IN ORDER FOR THIS APPLICATION TO BE COMPLETE, YOU MUST ENCLOSE THE FOLLOWING: Surety bond in the amount of $1 , 000. Proof of insurance in the amo::nt of $100,000-$300,000-$50,000, and 10-day c-ncellati.on clause. Annual fee is a $30.00 flat rate fee, plus $15/truck, and a $30.00 transfer. fee (if applicable). -------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am the owner and operator of the above business and I have paid all license fees and axr:a required by law. The above information is correct. u`3-pl A p icant Date -------------------------------------------------------------------------- FOR CITY USE ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends: _ App oval Denial Other (specify) 7 . _ -,� S gnature o City Official Dat• I,i rensc�No. _ APPLICATION FOR SOLICITATION - $2(�� 1 T1ec Date Received $,/1' S? Date Expires CITY OFMACINd 1987 1335 BROWN ROAD SOUTH BOX 66 CRYSTkL_BAY, MN 55323 Or anization• '^ 9 � u� � �';_4z-,,_Phone _-72 9=5.?p.S7~- Address: Pepresentative: Phone Addy. eL,l��=s�"-j, Ca. :k One: Business Solicitation Contribution Solicitation Number of People Solicitating within the City !' Provide list of Names of Solicitors on back of this application. Type of Product to be s licited c-c'Jz/r�;e cp,/C' PERMIT EXPIRES 60 DAYS FROM APPROVAL Di.:E. POLICE CHIEF SHALL HAVE FIVE (5) BUSINESS LAYS IN WHICH TO ?.NVESTIGATE AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION PURSUANT TO ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 5.30 SUBD 5(a). ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON SOLICITORS SuL:d. 3. Prohibited Solicitation Practices. A. It is unlawful for any solicitor to engage in solicitation for any unlawful business or organizational purpose or activity. R. It is unlawful for any solicitor to p'i—tice harassment., nuisance, theft, deceit, or menacing, troublesome oz• der unlawful activities during the course of solicitation. C. It is unlawful for any solicitor t.o enter, or attempt to gain entrance, to residential premises displ ying at such entrance a sign with the words "Peddlers and Solicitors Prohibited" or "Iclicitors Prohibited". D. It is unlawful for any :.r i s ci t r to refuse to leave business premises whc requested by t h:, ovner , L =r.ee I. on i a charge thereof . E. It is unlawful for any person engage in contribution solicitation without completion of licensing or registration as herein provided. F. It is unlawful for any person to engage in business solicitation without a license as herein provided. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- The undersigned beret- agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additional requirements the City staff may have. Signature of Applicant: %..�: Date: 1iS A 7 ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- FOR CITY USE ONLY: After review of appl ication, staf f recommends the following: _ 4 Apptuval of application _ _ _ Denial of application Signature of City Official: _ _ _ Date: ,tus• �� blic* chin : Date: NOTICE Pursuant to Laws of Minnesota, 1984, Chapter 502, Article 8, Section 2 (270.7i) (Tax Clearance; Issuance of Licenses), the licensing authority is required to provide to the Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue your Minnesota business tax id^ntification num- ber and the social security number of each license appliew" Under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and the Fed- ral Privacy Act of 1974, we are required to advise you of the following regarding the use of this inf,-. - mation: 1. This information may be used to deny the issuance or renewal of your license in the event you owe Minnesota sales, employer's withholding or motor vehicle excise taxes; 2. Upon receiving this information, the licensing authority will supply it only to the Minnesota Department of Revenue. However, under the Federal Exchange of Information Agreement the Department of Revenue may supply this °e)rmation to the Internal Revenue Service; 3. FAILURE SUPPLY THIS INFORMATION MAY JEOPARDIZE OR DELAY THz FROCE.SSING OF YOUR LICENSE ISSUANCE OR RENEWAL APPLICATION. Please supply the following inforiTlation and return along with your application to the licensing authority. Last Narne first Name Riddle Initial applicant's rp icant's Address City, State, Zip Code C pp icant's ocia. Security itron . N-er, artner, etc. G'�� ustness a rr: a LAness Address city, State, Zip Code -3 2/s - Minnesota ax n ..an Numb;;" Z//; S yS tilgr hture ie APPLI PARADES and fi.a 'S CITY of ORONO, MT 323 Date:May, �� 19 81 _ Appl.'.cation Number — Name RESTART1 INC. Address 519 Oak Grove, Minneapolis, MN 55403 Location of Parade or Event 2625 North Shore Drive, Orono, MN Name of Persons and/or Organizations Handling the Event Restart, Inc.; Attn: Geoffrey W. Hands, 332-8494 Phone Nun;bers (;ontact : 332-8494 ; Event: I'll-. Kirt Woodhous< Date of Event Jul, 11 , 19 87 Hours of Event 5:00 pm to 9:00 pm Reason or Purpose To benefit Restart., Inc., a non-profit corporation formed t.o Provide residential services to survivors of traumatic brain injury. Insurance Coverage _Will be bound following issuance of one -day liquor license Amount Requesting ma., nuns thr()ugh assigned risk pool (or'v source) Company Assigned risk pool - Copy of Insurance Certificates to be Submitted with this Application. I am aware of all applicable State Fnd other laws r(yarding Parades and Special Events and will ehide by same. I also agree to hcic the City of Orono harmless from all liabilities that may arise directly or indirectly from the Parade or Special Event approved by the granting of this \\ permit. R!, f A'.-iT INC-- by Fee: $25.00 "' Signature of Applicant Fee Paid: Date: S - !I 19 g Check ` Cash Initials Office Use Only: RECOMMENDED: Yeses ho Public safety Director Approveu: Yes No IClerk -Administrator Remarks: ONE DAY SETUP PERMIT Date of event: July 11, 1987 Titae: 5:00 pin to 10:00 pin w « L,punr Cnntrot DtrtPfon tom, yt PR GOOF H•nor4r nuitd,na 07 400 c•d•t sir••t STA'[ OF MINNESOTA at. Pit.). Mltm•.ote -45101 1612r 29061W DEPARTMEAT OF PUBLIC SAFETY APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO ONLY ALLCW CONSUMPTION & DISPLAY CF INTOXICATING LIQUOR IThii Application Shall Be Type- itten and Submitted Before June tit of rich Year) lit answering the following questions "APPLICANT" shall be governed as follow, For a Partnership, one of the partners %hall execute this application for all members of the partnership Fnr a Corporation, one officer shell exerule this application for all officers, directors, an f itockholde,s. f „ a Club, one of thq club officers shall execute this application for oil the members. If add uonal spaie ,s required, use a separate sheet of paper, indicating by number the question answered. (FEE FOR PERMIT - R10Q%MX $25.00) EVERY OUESTION MUST BE ANSWERED 1 GI fret• u•. Hands a, a Director ,N•m• of n•ritM mMfna •pollution) rr I;.ndirWu41 owner, pMtMr, tNl:c w, ;lob ofncNl for I in bete, �f RI:Sli H, IP:C. a Alinnc;:uta r_orporat lon IMgi•It, notn•i or p•rtn•n, nam4 of COMOr•Uon, of nom or club) hereby apply for a pe:rnit nllowing consumption and display of intoxicating liquor to be located at f2-15 Nnr.Eh Shnrr.�,)F•fvi -_---- Municipality of f)rnnti IStr••t •dd•"s end/or Lot And clock nutnt.•rl Post Office of Orono County of Ifc.,-..<'I, n I rrrw�,t.,�� ma 8•c r.onl State of Mmnesot i, in .ccordance with the provisions of M.S. 340.1,19. 2. Will business be Unerater as a private club or public pace Pr t va I t, n:, • i v c i n I t •, . r;n�n lI y ) 3.State type of business nt,ntAsli tV.r nont (,raanizatir,)n 4. FOR A. PUBLIC BUSINFf:S. If a partner.hip, state name and address of each member of partnership; if a corporation, state name and address of officers and directors. �lir, st LAt'ht,ti IAddr sl - va••••I IAdd, w.l Na.n•I IAdd••.,I --- 5. FOR A PRIVATE: CLUB: Date club was organized _ is club incorpo number of members _ , len,ph of time in preY.ent location , is club h it, owned or rented _ _ wh-it is the rnentoership dies what are the requ"ements for mere twrshtp Dt:xs rl_rb ma,r,r r,n wicker% to be tlsed by members for storing intoxicating !iquor ___ Names )f all `fflar7 and/or directors of the chub: w•.. •, r MI�wM 4 ••••• 1 A..Ir••il N••v, I r.JM•i41 Enclose with this alpfslicatton a crispy of the Cantitution and By Laws of the club and eurront list of bona t"fe m.rnbnrt 6 " anrr r aint n. any partr•er. corporation ofhcar cf direr tof club officer or difeeter, is 1w: a citizen of the • fink St ites list such non Of 1-n, M'. I .�rl i It..IjIAn I ito ,ame of fierscin who welt (Berate or Trans" busrneaa t-` - 7r Ll ---- y C)n f' ,, ,• , Th. nr,t)l:sh,"ent locates of to be located Clr un.i esa!l [ ueLullst ,ut Lh Kure ) 9 ►fo s al • It- wf—wrs clnsll.wl order the tor,. q t,r 1.: lttsdt Otial t •. 00 Dap t NS! • 11., a ati Cat►re. -•-•_yam+. 10. State name and address of owner or owners of building wherein the husincss will be located. _ Run 5 'ar—l-Au 1SiL1Sit1tw-- — 2G2S Sir, r t 1i Sh., rr. Ili•--='-r (1 rtjnj%& r-. uU ,.m.l 1A(Idr on) 1. H.• ipplicant, if partnership, any partner; if corporation, any officer or director; if club, any club tficer or uirectar, ever had i tieense und, r the Minnesota Liquor Control Art revoked or suspended or been r lnvic;e(' n iy violation of State Laws or local ordinances; it sn, give date and details 12. It �,ppM if partnership, any t,a Peter; if corporation, any officer or director; if club, any club officer or directo., nemlxt of the governin!1 body of the mu ipality or county in which this permit is to I.nr issued; if so. - •tRcity---•__--_ 13. Has ••)p) 'tip, any p,-leer, t' cr)tporatron, any officer or director; if club, any club officer ., dr. r sr whatsnevct, dire(:tly or indirectly, in any liquor estahliishment in the State of Minnesota f_ .. Give name and address of such establishment 14 Furnish the nnmc atic' address of (it least three businfss references, including one bank ,r.ference: Ttein C'itic.,i F,.-deral _ b_t_ltirleanyli<+ )•,•^•) fAd MlHI ti'uiur ltcr:entr< e 5 84.11 Wayeata Illy(L tilinneanoliS; 55. 2 (ro.e •nl (Add• 91) Cathedral Church of fit fork 15) Onk Grovr., Fiinna'apo1i:-:. Ally 55403 15. Ylhll tntuxic..tirig lipuor he sold un the I •emises (,r) State whetlu;r aUpl:cahon :s 1. Original _• ) 2 Renewal _ � 3. Transter (Ill St,tc r.9Krther dancino teal he ;ierrnlftr<l u'i the prre Ises Yr"� 17 A— the prern)srs now occupwd, qr to t^: occupied, eor,rely .c,. ate and exclusive frnm other hViirltiS9 [•;ta!)h-,f)tn('r�t Y 10- Sfatc trade :a-w to he ., •(} __.__, _. ; � j•, 1-) , fart _ 19 State a)teth,r an "Ott `;ah - or -9ff Sal: - NJ ,n Intoxicating Ma,t Beverage, License has or will he granted in ccmjunctton to r.!n; lowness an(! for the sarnr premises {t: 20 K,-, there br-rn ts:cijd, or will :here be issued, a $!A,00 Fedora! Retail Liquor Dealer's $},will T)■ Stamp fvr fire sale of liquor on these premises _ .,, 21 Nw your pbenwit"t an WI11111111ill1w eew""I the cenallwlotion SQL c .0018. M anto■icattrig I)alow _X"i.__ _ 22. If •pppahr o odor ton•nq :)rd,nance how is tocatbnra of bud" Ciassehed ( _--- -- 1 %-.Ov • .•, %me rM .wA awl0 we"/ wf, q—.a..w wa ram. +Ir..rw W H W on r .n " . _ d am m_ � o_ +ti •.wall,-. rMwW •a.M AID ON" d ,. •wan..w .a I%" .r+t.lar... .. a6. r.aa.•. I. p.. O.•••••.• ,pw....... "mmik* e" a.w. ,.- M •yM..» ......• A a" eiom •TWOI 11 *STU" THAT •F•♦ Pt OWT Iw(NO on, .ej[ a Owl OOT ALL'" Time oAle Or MITOa.e.AIUM lle)<A Flaw... $10MAla Vereli. is Mu L1Fair .4.00 Or am la , ward SIT 11111,16 loop, ow.... LM t tq. NU CONSIDERATION WILL E GIVEN TO RES1ABT, iRC 1._ _ THIS APPLICATION UNl_(ra,S A►PR-)yEO AS �. •. .•s.uMaa�..• HEREINAFTER oh0VIDED 1 y.y... If Apploc.,••t w Wcattrf ,n 00 co.�n/y .,roan \� `1 t l�!gAn or MM fiord of Counnf C.ormwn' •ws <W h,s or •• all `.W- • """ h•(•FoiMt.rhvt oh11r aW(wp tYtth r t(,••l ni oh- il Subscllb 11 //� sworn .-W the /( `• J.s I' ap(d •' •^' .a aTT•cf w • tlhwsK' AM � t r ►Fps..1 t 1 the :.Au 1 11 Or Ms PVW. !nl( t vo p' y ` s:• + •a.o. nn • • 1 —.- 7L. _ aop•Ovp h cu,)•ps of th.s xpPl•cet•w Now • t Mb l loO t.1.Ml ee - — - - 1(ombr memo Am N is • w Internal Revenue Service District Director Department of the Treasury Date: 1 1 JUL 1986 ZOE Dear Applicant: [mplwrw IdeMelead. Number. Y/�/S Y y0 /v Aee Wng hrbd E lW deegf j,& 3/ Founda0og Status Cla. •1 tkm; Adnnq Ru11n[ M1riod % & .non to Contact: Canted Tekpharw No~ Af Based on Information supplied, and assuming your operations will be as stated In your application for recognition of exemption, we have determined you are exempt from Federal income tax under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Because you are a newly created organization, we ere not now making a final determination of your foundation status under section (a) of the Code. Rowever, we have determined that you ean reasonablybeexpected be 0 "publicly supported organization desc ribad In section/��'� ���/y awl/sO9/Xy) Accordingly, you will be treated as a publicly supported organization, and not as a private foundation, during an advance ruling period. This advance ruling period begins on the date of your inception and ends on the date shown above. Within 90 days after the end of your advance ruling period, yot must submit to us information needed to determine whether you have met the requirements of the applicable support test during the advance rnling period. It you estaLlish that you have been a publicly supported organization, you will be classified as a section o09,8)(1) or 509(a)(2) organization as long as you continue to meet the requirements of the applicable support test. If you do not meet the public support requirements during the advance ruling period, van will be classified as a private foundation for future periods. Also, if you are classified as a private foundation, you will be treated as , private foundation from the date of your inception for purposes of sections 507(d) and 4940. Crantor'l and donors may rely on the determination that you are not a privets foundation until 90 day; after the end of your advance ruling period. If you submit the required lnf rmatlon within the 90 d;.ys, grantors and donors may continue to rely on the advance determination until the Service makes a final determination of your foundation status. However, if notice that you will no longer be treated as a s ec tlo n/7eQ1y ,,)I Yjot �?fIf Oorganlzat ion is published in the Internal Revenue Bullatin, grantors and donors may not rely in this leterminatlon after the date of each publication. A:so. ; granter or donor may not rely on this determination if he or she was in part responsible for, or was aware of, the act or failurr to act that r.. .lied in your Ls: of :act lorV7t�,�'/ '� /A,i St%,7'(I)status. or acgarred knowledge 11smK�l. the internal Revenue Service/ had given ootrce that you eculd be removed from a:rialrlcatlon .1,.1.:u<tioa'7f �b,t/�N %/'J/,{t ) I V prgan l eat ion. 1-11 Ile S. Darbarn St., Ch,cu'y, M. 60604 1etter 1045(DO) (Rev. 10- 31 N° Z 438 JAF.ki tqg r tiF 6 TAT E FZa All fie Whom Zlicse }3rescnis Shall (�ontc, (5reeting: WhrrCaS, Articles of Incorporation, duly signed and acknowledged under oath, have been recorded in the office of the Secretary of State, on the—m**teth day of Januanr , A. D. 19 RA for the incorporation of _2ESTAEM, MC under and in accordance with the provisions of the Minnesota Nonprofit Corporation Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 317 Now. thrrdOU by virtue of the powers and duties vested in me by law, as Secretary o State of the State of Minnesota. I do hereby certify that the said Is a legally organized Corporatio nder the laws of this State. Waness my official signature hereunto sub- scribed end the Great Seal of the State of Minnesota 'hereunto 64'xed th's day of K J. r s _1 :_3tr __ �n the yev of our Lord Kt . .r- ,.�,) One !hovsnro n.ne hunere�dJ and 04 1 i S State. Secrel ary of ea i RESTART, INC. BOARD OF DIRECTORS Judith Ann Preston, President 1401 Lakeview Avenue South Minneapolis, MN '35416 374-9426 Rev. Canon Rona R. Harding Vice -President 617 Kenwood Parkway Minneapolis, MN 55403 377-8019 AFFILIATION Peavey Grain Company Senior Programmer/Analyst 730 2nd Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402 370-7573 Cathedral Church of St. Mark Clergy 519 Oak Grove Street Minneapolis, Mn 55403 870-7800 Thomas R. Carlson Hennepin Technical Centers Secretary Special Education 3440 Fremon• Avenue South 1820 North Kenium Lane Minneapolis, Mn 55408 Plymouth, MH 55404 824.3449 332-8494 Geoffrey W. Hands Management Consultant Treasurer 1611 Park Avenue South 1809 Knox Avenut' South Minneapolis, MN 55404 Minneapolis, MN 55403 332-8494 j 377-7496 I"Rlg�fOMhtTTiB-- Thomas P. Bagaert 3820 Macalester, 7003 Minneapolis, MN 55421 789-0837 (Anit ara• x h1 52 PNSt.,a M01 `3.24-3154 HFns Dr er 2421 1'rvi g Avs -5�1h Min •pal of MH "405, 37, 5188 Control Data Company Associate Applicatio.- Engineer 4105 Lexington Avenue Arden Hill*, MN 5512G 482-4209 Dakota's Childr • Inc. D"rect of rsng /I 400 W" Ma ie wen Wept/St. 1, MN 551'.8� 45 1286 Hans Dekker ArcAnug cts �'A soc. P4sidaCt / 24'21 Irving AvethM1nnarpalle,MN5 374 -5 L�9 ...a ..w•... ... aau�wu a,ai rs m .p", a , 11o1 It:art: Page I pJazz R S So election: brit equals Jan A f`J M April 23, 198 and Pirst.Nate.l is not equal to TEST Mai I iaq.Nam ----------------------------'--- Address.) Addres,.3 Telrpha .M Tel rphont. W,1 Tel 1phme. W.2 Jan and Ellen of e.er ----------------------------- 2615 Westin A,m, South ----------------------- Minneapolis, MN $5405 ------------ 417 377-3211 -------------------------- Berm and Nap Raulh 341 Raosey Road Nayt4la, He 55391 612 476-4530 Ellis and Staff Nand, 1809 Fro. Avenue South MinntApolls, M 55403 612 377-7491 612 332-8494 Connie Helm 6 Roger Most 6021 Puutr Drive Edina, M 55435 612 944-8891 Roger Nose SEE CONNIE HELEN Ptnny Hunt and Dsighl Oglesby 1625 N 26th Street Minneapolis, M 5:405 612 377-7559 612 340-5592 To, Hunt and John Whtel.han 140 Srilh Avrnu! Wayzata, M 5539I 612 473-2552 Na Vlelan Leith 2416 B Lake of the Lilts Blvd Minntapoln, M 55403 612 374-4490 612 537-5100 Rob McCaspbell and Barbara Vail@ 2726 C Huabeldt Avenue South Minneapolis, M 55409 612 074-1343 David and Karen Miley 6544 Ntlryan Avenue Edina, M 55435 612 941-7717 612 340-6741 Brun and Sara Momck 42t5 Poplar Drive Bolden Yailey, M 55472 612 374-7444 612 338-2814 Dsight Oglesby SEE PENNY ALN1 Jib and JOYce Sharp 2017 AOeline Court Wayzata, M 55391 612 473-9906 612 340-6787 Barbara Yule SEE ROP RC CPMIEL Peggy arbor and Bob Whitlock 1820 Dupont Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55403 612 377-5652 612 729-4001 612 331-66I0 Dub Whitlock SEE PEGGY NEBER Angie and Kirt Woodhouse 160D Mt. Curve Avenue Minneapolis, NM 55403 612 317-2605 612 475-1307 � Cno+,e Not�+ywSR�n,re CITY 01' ORONO CRYSTAL DAY, MINNESOTA SS323 AMINISTRATIVE OFFICES Phone: 473-7358 APPLICATION FOR LICENSE TO SELL CIGARETTES AT RETAIL 19 g% (Chapter 62. Orono Municipal Code) ` 1. Name of Applicant )b0ZVb1*ta `.UWDVS�'pC. Address 3LUL\ Sti we\�.ut 1�1r Phone: VZl-T&yC) 2. Sales Location; Address t- Phone "V(1-Wt eOM ♦1 3. Principal business carried on at this location n ;"A'a \ \ 'k M oar S1kw't 4. Method of Sales: Vending Machine i ,_ Over counter_Othcr I hereby make application for license to sell cigarettes at retail at the above location subject to the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the tillage of Orono Burin¢ the following qunrterly periods: _ Feb -Mar -Apr LICENSE FEES LC, May- unu-July Expiration data of license, Jan. 31, each year. Annual license fee is Aug -Sept -Oct $20.00. :there applicable, as in the ease of seasonal sales, this may be . Nov -Dec -Jan pro-rato-I by quarters, at $5.00 per quarter. Make remittance payable to city of Orono \ \ Signature of applicant ��`9-LSL,. \ Dated S/ZI JIM For Offie: Ilse Action: CITY OF ORONO P A Y R 'h�LIYrD END s 17 I EgPL-NO NAME DIV Y-T-D * GROSS GROSS EXP/ALLOW ANDERSON BL 31 13587.64 1607.82 BERNHARDSO ME 12 18312.12 1939.32 BOBZIEN SA 31 8287.2S 859.3B BOSMA JL 12 3637.59 370.80 BRINKHAUS JF 42 12306.49 1227.12 BURMASTER RP 90 1697.43 207.38 BURMASTER WD 31 268.08 0.00 BYDZOVSKY PP 31 4672.06 0.00 CARLSON WJ 92 12481.24 1318.95 CHESWICK GB 31 13930.97 1376.72 CORNICK JL 31 10383.35 1124.96 DENNESON RJ 35 155.55 109.65 EHRENBERG DL 90 4086.15 373.14 ELDER JA 35 260.10 112.20 ENGLISH 11 IH 31 11007.85 1384.29 ERICKSON DJ 93 158.10 66.30 ERICKSON MR 31 13755.17 1376.72 FINK Cl 90 1804.01 183.75 FRITZLER JM 31 13128.25 1273.52 GAFFRON MP 33 11280.54 1129.04 GERHARDSON JR 42 15584,75 ISS9.84 GREGORY JD 42 10869,41 1192.87 HALLIN DM 12 9617.98 962.63 HANSEN SC 42 9699.62 1070.97 HANSTNG CJ 31 4274,96 457.80 HENSEL MM 31 10072.35 1134.06 HIGUS PA 90 4343,03 448.95 JACOBS TJ 33 I1286.16 1129.04 JOHNSON BP 31 12S14.13 1249.20 K1LBO MH 3t 1S893.30 1590.72 KIRNYCZUK M 3t 7853.69 502.80 KNUTSON CA 15 7787.76 712.66 KUEHN TM IS 15238.66 1525.20 MABUSTH JA 33 13200. 46 1321.20 MANUEL CM 90 0.00 0.00 MCGOWAN LR 90 11534.85 1156. 64 MIKELSON RA 15 7069.55 881.94 MORAN MF 31 12641 36 1679.08 MOROWCZYNS J 31 12622.29 t452.20 MROSS FT 61 8293,95 801.44 NAAS TL 12 7526 10 766.78 OAS DO 93 618.75 193.50 OMAN LE 33 8909. 48 663. 44 PETERSON PL 12 4479 22 468. 03 PETERSON Ru 93 497 25 94.50 PETRAN JC 33 '_92 00 0 00 OUAST WA 92 1017f 98 983.52 QUINN NL 93 5! 8v 1P5 38 ROSS JA 93 95, 63 95 63 SASS 1J 42 100911 44 1070 97 °IKRFLN DE 42 960'1 61 1070 97 :! 31i�toilNG1 iWly 2GW7 if ORONO CITY OF ORONO P A Y RI Y-T-D • - - - - - - EMPL-NO NAME DIV GROSS GROSS EXP/ALLOY SLIGO SR 93 0.00 0.00 SMITH JR 92 10342.70 1113.60 STEFFENHAG RE 93 10406.10 1041.5E STEVENS BG 93 812.26 370.50 THIES BR 90 1749.D1 11S.50 THOMTON MR 31 9599.4E 984.87 TOMCHECK LF 31 9309.S3 1270.51 TOMCZYK MY 31 12S72.12 13S4.61 COUNT GRAND 48,894.13 5 PAID OOOS4 TOTAL 00059 TOTAL TOTAL FICA TAX GROSS m 25,497.67 EMPLOYERS FICA A = GROUP HEALTH 9 = PHYSICIAN'S HEf,�-IH PLAN C = BLUE CROSS/BLUE SHIELD D = MEDICAL CENTER PLAN E = PRUDENTIAL r m COORD. HEALTH CARE 0 = M!NNESOTA HMO H TRANS-AMEPICA OCC. I = BANNERS LIFE J = MUTUAL SERVICES K m MUTUAL OF OMAHA L = EMPLOYEE'S BENEFIT M m AETNA N m NICOLLET EITEL 0 m LEAGUE OF CITIES 2 m HEALTH CARE MAINT ACCT. MISSING HOSP CODE FOR SOME EMPL'S CITY DF ORONO P A Y R C ryi _ Y—T—O » — EMPL—NO N E OIV CROSS CROSS E%P/ALLOW CALLAHAN EJ 11 725.01 241.67 GOETTEN J 11 1208.35 241.67 GRABEK 1 11 1500.00 300.00 PETERSON BA 11 1208.35 241.67 SIME JR UJ 11 1208.35 241.67 COUNT GRANO 11266.68 PAID OOOOS TOTAL 00005 TOTAL TOTAL FICA TAX GROSS = .00 EMPLOYERS FICA A = CROUP HEALTH B = PHYSICIAN'S HEALTH PLAN C = BLUE CROSS/BLUE SHIELD 0 • MEDICAL CENTER PLAN E = PRUDENTIAL F = COORO. HEALTH CARE G = MINNESOTA HMO H = TRANS—AMERICA OCC. I = BANKERS LIFE J = MUTUAL SERVICES K = MUTUAL OF OMAHA L = EMPLOYEE'S BENEFIT M n AETNA N = NICOLLCT EITEL 0 a LEAGUE OF CITIES Z = HEALTH LAKE MAI,.T ACCT MIe5IN6 HO_..P COOE FOR SOME EMPL'S I907 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO DATE 146020 05/20/87 1 .60]1 OS/20/87 1.6031 OS/20/81 1.6"1 05/20/el 146032 05/20!87 116065 OS/20/87 146065 95120/87 116065 05/20/87 1.6081 03 20/87 OS120191 OS/E0187 116!21 05/20/67 116124 05/20/S7 146124 OS/20/67 t .6130 O5/20/87 146130 05/20/67 146130 OS/20/67 11613] OS/20'67 146133 OS/20/91 116133 05/20/87 146133 OS/t0:8T CHECK REGISTER Ah-B9-B1 1.40 + AMOUNT "EN0O5 ITEM DESCRIPTION RCC MI NO IMF t P O O ptGYM t5 00 AMERICAN MAIL BANK AGENT FEE 44-4410-901-66 25 00 A .0 ALE 60 AT C T COMM TELEPHONE 91-IH9-I t9-P Z 06 AT A I COMM TELEPHONE 01-I316-I14-23 T 61 AT G T COMM TELEPHONE 91-1 HB-I 1]-N 16 10 A 52 61 AMER SCIENTIFIC PROD OFFICE SUPPLIES 91-NU-It9-)1 52.67 . uA-Cn 65 00 BLACKOWIAK C SONS APRIL RUBBISH 9i-IN)-B99-I1 50. 00 SLACRONI.K C SONS APRIL AUSBISH B1-RN)-t90-OI 46 00 BLACNOWIAX A SONS .PRIL RUBBISH TI-43.3-E1{y9 161 OC 59 50 BROWN PHOTO OFFICE SUPPLIES {1-Atlµ+t10• 59 Sc ... cn 15. IT CHESWICK/GARY MILEAGE PROPPING 11-IH1-�t9-) 15.47 A 15 £5 CITYVIEW PLMBG A NTG MINT SVAFL• 15 25 A u. N 12 00 COCA COLA VENDIIIG EQUIP RENTAL TI-4331-{If-9F 334 80 COCA COLA VENDIM. AIR PURCH 11-NEO-S11-9{ 168 75 COCA COLA VENDING CONCESSIONS RESALE 11-N9t-{9•-N S.S 55 Au Uf 2280 COLONIAL LIFE INS CO LIFE INS 91-u H-I ll q+ 36 TS COLONIAL LIFE INS CO LIFE INS BI-•IEt-Ip-)1 62.25 COLONIAL LIFE INS CO LIFE INS PI-1110-1H-31 o A. uA-aB 5 70 COMM-RED SALES TAX SALES TAX APRIL 91-tltt-U1-H + 1 30 COMM-REV SALES TAX GALES TAX APRIL 91-]B99-669-N 3133S 00 COMM-c_V SALES TAX SALES TAX APRIL 11-ttlt-IH-H 140. 00 COMM-REV SALES TAX SALES TAX APRIL "-""-BOB-9B + 1987 CITY OF ORONO CNECR REGISTER 05-21-81 .u9 CHECK MD DATE AMOUNT VERDOII ITEM DE IILR VTION ACCOUNT p0 iNV • . D R Ne 6[ACf • 146133 05,20/57 79T OD CORN -REV SALES TAR SALES TAR APRIL 7.-B222-000-00 N,2T9 DO ♦ AuuA ...--Ks 146142 05/20/87 249 ?2 COPY OUR PR INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-6210-019-fe ♦ 146142 •5/20/87 16. 55 COPY DUP PR INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-6210-OS1-1. 146142 OS/20/87 2A 73 COPY DUP RR INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-A210-069-15 146142 OS/20/B7 173 ?A COPY DUP PR INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-1816-121-11 ♦ 146142 OS/20/87 T-A 19 COPY OUP PR INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-0210-170-33 116142 OS/20/87 3B6 32 COPY DlN1 PR INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-17J-31 1 .61.2 OS/20/87 6 IB COPY D:P PR Iw' OFFICE SUPPLIES G1-4210-E41-42 ♦ 931 03 A 1<6150 05/20/87 16 00 CULLIGAN APRIL SOFTENER 146150 OS/20/87 10 50 CULLIGAN APRIL SOPTENEF "-.]°]-55-•0 • 146160 05/20/6- 2 25 CULLIGAN APRIL SOFTENER 28. TS . \ 1.6163 O6/20/87 1,648 32 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO BEER PURCHASE `1-.B15-S •-^6 ♦ 106163 05/20/07 .? ..- DAY DISTRIBUTING CO BOTTLE RETURN 146163 05/20/87 10. 95 DRY OISTRIBUTINL LO NISC FJRCH - -.92: 5'A `. 1,611 83 . 1 .61BT OS/2U/S7 2.488 BE EAST SIDE BEVERAGE BEEP PURCHASE 146157 05/20/87 27. 20- EAST SIDE BEVERAGE BOTTLE RETURN 2,.61 65 A • 1.6:9. 05/20/8? 31 BO EAGLE SMACKS "ISO PUNCH -AS.. E a 34 80 . 146199 05/20,67 3,767. 06 ROLF E ERICKSON MAY SERVICE 3176T.00 A Au o. • 1.6202 .5120187 11.91 ENRICH RAN INC CC CONCESSIONS RESALE -°Et.- -. --' . - 11 91 A 1.623? OS/20/87 200 91 SOUR >RR pl% PURCHASE 200 91 A 0 1967 CITY OF ORONO CHECK RECIS.ER e5-ie-97 -AGE 1 CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO IMV R P C 9 MES.AGI • 1.6240 05/20/87 50. 00 FRITZLER ] MARK SI:N 91131 01-21R0-Ee.-00 50 00 . 0 1A6254 O9/20/67 2,661 Tl GENERAL REPAIR LV MAINT LIFT STATION T]-q1.-EN-ei 2,681 T] 146256 OS/20/97 3 38 GENUINE PARTS CO MAINT AUTO EQUIP 01-AJ 11-121-T 116256 05,20,87 iT 08 GENUINE PARTS CO MAINT MISC EOVIP 116256 OSY20/87 85 GENUINE PARTS CO MINT AUTO EQUIP 72-4111-541-91 146256 OS/20/87 1 28 GENUINE PARTS CO MAINT AUTO EQUIP 73-111!-S49-92 A 22 59 . •...v •.. ..65 146258 0S120107 31 OS GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD UTILITIES 01-.324-011-' 31 OS 1162T2 05/20/67 117. 00 G 6 N SERVICES APRIL v -Ai5 01-.P 21-i.9-.2 116272 OS/P^."87 15.56 G e R SERVICES APRIL HEN 01-.211-N9-.J 146272 US/20/81 Il 20 C 6 S SERVICES APRIL RENTALS 01-A313-099-1- • 1462T2 OS/201eT 67 60 G 6 A SERVICES APRIL RENTALS 01-A113-121-14 1,46272 05/20/81 2. 92 G G R SERVICES APRIL RENTALS T2-1221-SH-91 116272 05/20/67 31. 38 G G N SERVICES APRIL RENTALS 73-4221-569-9i • 146272 OS/20/e7 20. 10 G 6 N SERVICES APRIL RENTALS H-IEP1-5e0-93 321 06 • .....• ...... 116Y82 OS120187 32. 00 MANSING/CAROL CLOTHING 01-.e21-111- 1 • 32. 00 • 1141164 OS/2<. Ii 56. 20 NAPP YS POTATO CHIP CONCESSIONS RESALE TA-.602-59t-9. 56 20 • 116295 OS/20/87 51 10 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED GROUNDS MAINT SUPPLY 01-•2])-Ne-Aa 116Y95 05/YO/67 IT. 00 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED GROUNDS MAINT SUPPLY 01-p.3-210-6' 346Y95 05/20/87 55.00 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED GROUNDS MAINT SUPPLY 14-4231-590-43 • 15L 10 . u.H• u.-CAS A 146305 05/26/97 5 60 NEW OTT OEPT TAX POSTAGE 01-q21-010-11 5. Po . • 999u. •..-h S A 1967 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO GATE 1.6308 05/20 APT 146308 05/20: 9: 1.6330 es/2018? 146330 OS/20/87 u uu AM 1,46335 05/20/ST s • 1A6JE] 05,20:87 14637I OS/20/81 e 1.6376 05/t0/87 O 1{690{ OS/e0/?7 1{6{04 OS/20/81 146{0{ 05/20/01 0 14640A 05/20/67 14640. OS/eo/01 0: t U642J OS/20/87 146445 oS/ep/Bl 1{6{4S OS/EO/BT � uuo 1{6{60 0S/t0/87 Q 146460 05/20/61 CHECK 96613TER 11-46-BY ..p I AMOUNT VENDOR ]TEN DESCRIPTION ACC" NB INV I I 0 B ",1." TT 6f MEAN CT♦ SHERI.. DIT EOUVIK w! 01-432-IY9-]1 00.41 NEW CTT SHERIFF OFT HAIRY RISC [0U11 01-q4-121-T 718 03 . IT 32 ICNA RETRANT CHAP 1Ce. .,to TO S/] OI-.�10-B19 �Y 11 32 ICRA RETRMNT COPP ICNA S/{ TO S/11 I5. 69 135 00 ILLIES 6 SON GROUND AAINT SIMPLY Y•-1!P. •e •! 135 00 36. 99 TON JACOBS "ILEA" 01-1301-11.-13 36 {9 . ]S. 25 JIM CO DIET MISC PURCN 1-ADt0-9..-95 3.9 25 .-4 25 JOHNSON PAPER CC STORE SUMPL.ES YI-AY )0 -SSE 90 {. 2S 101 2T THE -AAER ADVERTISING a•-3'tp-p00-pv 20..3 THE LAMER ADVERTISING pI-{3Y 3-039-IY 61. 29 THE LAMER ADVERTISING 15 14 THE LARER ADVERTISING 01-4323-290-6. {00.60 THE LAMER ADVERTISING 1�-U2]-SIA-95 606.1] . 600 00 LEAGUE OF AN CITIES LAC BUILDING OI-{pf-010-� 600 DO 919.46 LYMAN LUMBER BLDG MINT 01-4EJ'-099-11 23. 66 LYMAN LUMBER SPRING CLEANUP 0+ 9311-t.9-{Y 9{] 14 I 2.736 00 IURN VII GIST BE`E PURCHASE 7l-.G.S-S'.-95 4S.64- 6ARw V11 DIET BOTTLE RETURN 1I-AB16-51{-9S 1987 CITY OF OR010 CHECK REGISTER OG-E6-Rl PAGf CNECX NO DATE AMOU.,; VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACC (MANY NO IN'. 0 P 0 • .1Y1.11 1.6.60 OS/20/51 ISO 20 PARK VII GIST BEER PURCHASE 2.840 36 1 :<4R2 p5: 20'S> 54E 71 MARTINS NAVARRE 66 MAIMT AUTOS 01-43.1-It9-31 1.4C462 US/20/67 11021 30 MARTINS NAVARRE 66 CONVERT NEW CARS 01-4S50-169-31 I.Sf-4. OI I46H4 OS/20/B7 IS.T34 TE METRO WASTE CONTROL )WME 73-126t-000-CO IS,T34. 7E 1.6.50 OS/20/81 111 68 MIDWEST ASPHALT STREET MAIMT SU PLY 0•-.233-EH-• !1 68 146485 05/20/87 13 60 MPLS OXYGEN CO UTIi ITIES 01-.12. ?49-+- 33 60 I46490 05/20/87 52. 32 MINMEGASCO UTILITIES 01-43E4-C19-,- 82 32 146505 05/20/97 30.00 MN FIRE R SAFETY MAINT MISC EQUIP 11-4342-111-11 146505 05/20/87 38. 00 LN FIRE 6 SAFETY MINT MISC EQUIP 01-4342-099-1• 146505 05:20/87 146.00 MM FIRE 6 SAFETY RAINT MISC EQUIP c'.342-2.1-.2 146505 05/20/87 T E AN FIRE 4 SAFETY MAINT MISC EQUIP 01-.34E-290-61 146505 OS/2-97 12 00 MN FIRE 4 SAFETY MAINT MISC EQUIP 71-4342-SIS-90 146505 05/2, 27.80 MN FIRE 4 SAFETY MINT MISC EQUIP 12-4142-549-9' 146505 OS/? 41. TO MN FIRE 4 SAFETY MRINT 118C EQUIP 13-.342-569-9t 146505 OS/ 35 00 MN FIRE 4 SAFETY MA1NT MISC EQUIP 14-4342-510-93 336 00 1465 U O5/20/BT 46. 95 MR -ATE TREASURER UNCLAIMED PROF 01-4t40-0 N-r% 48.95 116532 OS/20/87 10 05 MOROWCZYNSNI/JARES MILEAGE 01-418'-129-31 10.05 1163J4 03/EO/87 i10. 96 MOTOROLA INC MINT MISC EQUIP 174 96 1987 CITY OF MORO CHECK REGISTER 05-16-9T PAGE 9 I CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT vE MD011 ITCH DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO INV 0 P 0 R NE95A Gf u9. ...-C66 146548 OS/20/87 29 TA NAVARRE HARDWARE APRIL HARDWARE 01-4216-It1-31 146548 OS/20/87 59 NAVARRE HARDWARE APRIL HARDWARE 010210-114-33 146548 05/20/87 IE. 20 NAVARRE HARDWARE APRIL HARDWARE 01-4231-099-17 2 146548 OS/EO/87 16. E6 NAVARRE HARDWARE APRIL MANWARE 01-4aM-195-35 14S516 OS/20/87 15 38 NAVARRE HARDWARE APRIL HARDWARE 01-4&X-949-12 146548 OS/20/87 28.72 NAVARRE HARDWARE APRIL HARDWARE 01-4232-t90-61 116518 05/20/07 5 B1 NAVARRE HARDWARE APRIL HARDWARE 01-434E-099-11 146548 OS/20/87 38 81 NAVARRE HARDWARE APRIL HARDWARE 01-9308-290-61 146548 05/20/87 99. S2 NAVARRE HARDWARE APRIL HARDWARE 01-4343-099-17 • 146516 OS/20/67 21.03 NAVARRE HARDWARE APRIL HARDWARE 01-4340-E99-42 146548 OS/EO/07 1 90 NAVARRE HARDWARE APRIL HARDWARE 11-9E10-S1S-90 1A6548 05/20/81 2 59 NAVARRE HARDWARE APRIL HARWARE 72-023R-5A9-91 • 146596 OE/2P/87 20 NAVARRE HARDWARE APRIL HARDWARE 13-1231-Slt-12 1.6548 OS/EO/BT 1.9 30 NAVARRE HARDWARE APRIL HAS WARE 14-4E31-590-V3 117 13. 2 C u6559 05/26/BT 653 22 NSP STREET LIGHTING 01-432S-269-42 146S59 OS/EO/BT Z56 61 NIP UTILITIES 71-9321-515-90 146559 05/20/67 126 06 NSP UTILITIES 13-432A-569-92 • 1.235.89 . 146S68 OS/20/BT 90 92 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 01-.320-129-31 146568 OS/-c0/8T !9.50 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE >1-4320-299-92 ♦ 146SGS 05:20/87 20.72 NORTHWESTERN BELL DATA PROCESSING 01-13SS-061-15 11656E 05,20/87 SE.30 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 7I-1300-S1S-96 146568 OS/20/87 l2.90 NORTHWESTERN BELL ADVERTISING 11-4323-SIS-IL • 116566 05,2018, 22. 02 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 72-1320-S99-5- 106568 OS/20/6T 16.ST NORTHWESTERN BELL DATA PROCESSING 72-435S-549-1- 116S68 15,20,87 33.03 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 13-9320-569-92 ♦ 116S68 05/20/87 24.66 NORTHWESTERN BELL DATA PROCESSING 11-43SS-S69-92 242. 32 . • Bo u. u.-[Ae 116591 OS/20/87 71.14 PUBLIC EMPL NET ASSN PERA 4/20 TO S/3 0I-1:A1-031-12 • 146597 05/20/61 1.33 PUBLIC EMPL NET ASSN PERA 4/20 10 5/3 01-4141-040-13 146597 OS/20/87 2.10 PUBLIC EMPL MET ASSN PENA 1/EO TO 513 61-1191-OS9-1-1 146597 05/20/87 113.85 PUBLIC EMPL MET ASSN REBA 9/20 TO 5/3 01-4141-069-15 ♦ 146597 05/20/67 95 82 PUBLIC EMPL RET ASSN PERA 1/EO TO S/3 01-4141-019-17 146597 OS/20/97 1,391. 93 PUBLIC EMPL MET ASSN REBA 9/EO TO 5/3 01-4141-111-31 146597 OS/20/87 S6_66 PUBLIC EMPL NET ASSN PENA 9/20 TO 513 01-0.11-IIS-31 ♦ 146591 05/20/87 T?.SO PUBLIC EMPL NET ASSN PENA 4/20 TO 513 01-6161-It1-31 146S17 OS/20/97 063.66 PUBLIC EMPL RET ASSN ?ERA 1/t0 TO S/3 01-1141-126-31 146597 05/20/87 226. SE PUBLIC EMPL NET ASSN REBA 0/20 TO 5/3 01-4141-I14-33 ♦ 146597 OS/EO/87 160.60 PUBLIC EMPL RET AS" PENA 0/20 TO SA 01-4141-009-92 146997 OS/20/81 51.69 PUBLIC EMPL NET ASSN PENA 9/20 TO 5/3 11-0101-t90-61 146597 OS/20187 163.96 PUBLIC EMPL NET ASSN PERA 9/EG TO S/3 T -A1 A1-515-9D 146597 OS/E0/87 129.19 PUBLIC EMPL MET AS" PENA 4120 TO 5/3 7E-I14I-S49-91 1967 CITY OF ORONO E CHECK NO GATE 0 146597 OS/20/87 146597 09/20/87 f 1.66n 05/20/57 0 •.•or 146624 OS120/87 • 14662: OS/20/ST 146604 05/20/87 146624 OS120187 • I46627 OS/20/87 IA6627 05/20/87 • 146627 05/20/87 t46627 05/20/87 146627 OS/20187 • 1.6628 OS120187 • 146626 PS/20/87 146629 05/20/B7 166626 05/20/87 • 146629 OS/20/8l 14662B 05/20/87 146628 05/20/87 • 146628 OS/c0/97 146626 05/20/87 t46628 05/20/87 • 1.6628 05,20,67 146628 05/20/87 146628 05/20/87 • 1466ES 05/20/67 146626 OS120/87 146628 05/20/97 0 ...... 0 1.6639 QS/20/57 0 u.... • 1.6658 OS/20187 0 uuu AMOUNT 135 55 .9.ST 3,19E 57 192 40 192 +0 . . 10 1A.95 2, 112 25 111 60- 2,019 TO 8 25 8 25 e 25 8 25 25 1 625 89. cT 5,503 .9 286 00 .65 00 937 96 398 16 S03 52 230.6T ♦T1 00 3A8. 08 560. 00 .0. 61 62 83 89 33 3.6,56 TO 99 11, 212 TT . 2.. 83 2. 83 r 9 50 9 50 . CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION PUBLIC EMPL PET ASSN PERA 4/20 TO 5/3 PUBLIC EMPL RET ASSN PERA 4'20 TO Y3 PEPSI COLA/TUP BTLG MI% PURCHASE OS-26-R1 PAGE ACCOUNT NO INV • P 0 • MESSAGE 73-A1A1-541-S2 TA -.I .1-590-91 lt-.820-SI.-f5 POGREBA GIST INC STORE SUPPLIES TI-4230-515-90 POGRERA GIST INC WINE PURCHASE TI-OIL-4u-f5 POGREBA DYST INC BEER PURCHASE TI-+915-51+-95 POGRERA GIST INC BOTTLE RETURN 71-4916-51+-95 PITNEY BONES POSTAGE 01-+321-031-12 PITNEY 90WE5 POSTAGE 01-4321-059-14 PITNEY BOWES POSTAGE 01-4321-069-15 PITNEY BONES POSTAGE 01-.J2t-1 1.-D PITNEY BONES POSTAGE 01-4321-249-42 POPHAM MAIM 6 ASSOC LEGAL -MARCH 01-+J01-OBO-�6 POPHAM HAIR 6 ASSOC LEGA_-MARCH 0'-4309-060 '6 POPHAM HAIK 6 ASSOC LEGAL -MARCH C1-.303-080-16 POPHAM HAIK G ASSOC LEGAL-NARCM 1-.303-080-16 POPHAM HAIN 6 ASSOC LEGAL -MARCH 01-.303-IT.-33 POPHAM MAIN 6 ASSOC LEGAL -MARCH 01-43O3-249-42 POPHAM MAIN 6 ASSOC LEGAL -MARCH 01-q03-Y90-" POPHAM HAIN 6 ASSOC LEGAL -GAF H 01-4303 POPHAM HAIK 6 ASSOC LEGAL -MARCH 01-.30: POPHM HAIN C ASSOC LECAL-MARCH 41-4303-.01-00 POPHAM MAIN 6 ASSOC LECAL-MARCH 41-.303-.02-Oo POPHAM MAIK G ASSOC LEGAL -MARCH 41-4303-40S-00 POPHAM MAIN C ASSOC LEGAL -MARCH 41-.303-.07-00 POPHAM HAIN E ASSOC LEGAL -MARCH 41-4303-411-00 POPHAM HAIK G ASSOC LEGAL -MARCH .5-4303-432-00 POPHAM HAIK G ASSOC LECAL-MARCH 73-4303-569-92 PROEM PHOTO SUP OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-174-33 R C INOENTIFICATIOMS PERSOMAL EQUIP O1-+221-129-11 1961 CITY OF ORONO CHECK REGISTER 05-20-97 FACE t , CHECK M0. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. IIN • P 0 0 r'BSA" f ' 196662 OS/20/e7 186. 15 REED CANDY t TOBACCO CONCESSIONS RESALE N-NQi01-9A 126 15 P •..••. ..•. CN1 1.6TD3 05/20/Rl 213 68 SPAULDING GOLF BALLS 7I-000-591-9. 213 69 IN uuu o•-CAS IA671t OS/ec/07 126 50 STATE -MN DOCUMENTS BOOMS 01-6240-174-33 • 126 50 . u.••• ...-CMS 146H0 OS/20/e7 169 95 STRETCHERS RESERVE EAP Ot-U9B-1n-J. 169 95 • • ••u•• •o-LAS • u61T6 05/20/87 .,.53. 55 THORPE DIST CO BEER PORCH 71-.e15-51.-15 146776 OS/20/87 15. 60- THORPE DIST CO BOTTLE RETURN 71-4316-514-15 •.A3T 95 • •..u• •. -CNS • 146779 05/20/87 3,190 00 TRACY OIL CO GABOL THE 01-1860-000-00 146779 OS/20/e7 320 00 TRACY OIL CO GASOLINE 70-4220-590-13 3,510 GO • •u..• u• SAS • 146796 OS/20/e7 14 IS UNIFORMS UNLIMITED CLOTHING t EQUIP 01-.221-t26-11 116796 05/20/07 309 45 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED CLOTHING 0 EQUIP 01-A221-t29-11 13. 60 • uAu• ••.-Ca9 • 1.6BJ5 OS/20/e7 90. 00 YARNING LITES INC EQUIP RENTAL 01-46311-P.9-42 90. 00 • •..... ... CAB 1-468.1 05/20/87 214. 33 WATER PRODUCTS CO YATFR METERS 41-0545-400-00 • 21,N. 33 146842 OS/2G/e7 2.150. 00 WAYZATA-CITY OF FIRE BERV 112 1987 01-9318-133-32 • 2.ISG.00 • UbB)J 05/20/07 17.O0 AMW T/A 21LVFRB[RG CONCESSIONS RESALE N-4602-S11-1♦ 11.00 L e I 1187 CITY OF OFONO CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT 146901 06/20/67 7.2 00 742 00 . I46902 OS/20/87 24 00 2..00 . 1,46903 OS/20/87 75.00 TS OC . u690A 05/20/87 50.00 SO 00 . 146905 OS/20/87 50. 00 SO 00 . 146906 052O/67 IS 00 146906 05120187 24. TO 89 TO I46907 OS/20/97 53. 03 S3. A3 . 1469DO 05/20/97 210. 00 210 00 146909 05,20/87 17. 50 17 SO . 146910 05/2018T SO 00 50 00 . 1.6911 05/20/87 .0. 21 .0 21 . 146912 05/20/87 2 04 146912 05/20/87 7 96 5.00 . 146913 05/20/87 10.00 10.00 . •,•••, 31.809.97 I,315. 1s 25.00 556.56 15.383 95 362 5. 18,864 50 2.433.79 73,771,49 CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION G&S CABINETS INC MAINT BLDGS LOTUS PERIODICALS IACP HOUSING BUREAU CONFERENCE NOELTING/GUENTNER SIGN 41131 REID/CHAR-ES SIGN R1125 EARL Y DAY 6 SONS FAINT BLOCS EARL N DIY 6 SONS FAINT GROUNDS RICKS SUPER VALU OFFICE SUPPLIES TWIN CITY TESTING SOIL TEST LEEF BROS INC STORE SUPPLIES FOTAS R F RFD VAR IPPL 01106 STATE AGENCY REV FO SOC SEC ACHIM COST PERA PERA .-S PERA PERA .-S CITY OF GOLDEN VALLT COMP UORTH SEMINAR 05-26-eT PAGE 1 ACCOUNT NO. INV 9 A 0 • MESSAGE 01-4343-051-17 01-4240-031-IE 01-4356-I21-31 01-2300-000-00 01-23DO-000-00 01-.343-129-31 74-4231-590-93 14-1210-S90-93 45-4306-432-00 7I-4230-515-90 01-3502-000-DO .1-.399-059-IS 01-I1.1-039-12 01-41.1-129-31 01-4356-031-12 FUND 01 TOTAL GENERAL FUND FUND 41 TOTAL PERM IMPROVE REVOLVING F FUND .. TOTAL 1982 SPEC ASSESSMENT FUN FUND 45 TOTAL 1985 SPEC ASSESSMENT FUN FUND TI TOTAL LIQUOR OPERATING FUND FURO 72 TOTAL WATER OPERATING FUND FUND 73 TOTAL SEWER OPERATING FUND FUND T. TOTAL GOLF COURSE OPERATING FD TOTAL r ina+ion -:]E -}gym S 4 I w. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 ATTENDANCE 7:30 P.M. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chairman Kelley, Bellows, Taylor, Johnson, and Brown. Cohen arrived at 7:46 - M. Hanson was absent. The following represented the ty staff: Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recot.der Peterso— Councilmember Callahan was also present. #1112 SMITH BAY MARINA & YACHT CiU" 1960 SHORELINE DRIVL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Present for this matter were Gerald Toberman and Woody Love. Zoning Administrator Mabusth reviewed that at the March 16, 1987 meeting, Planning Commision unanimously agreed that the proposed boat sales/service center use would be a less intense or less non -conforming use than the existing transmission shop. Planning Commission asked the applicant to submit a more detailed site plan of the operation. She reviewed the two site plans submitted: Exhibit E - Consists of 14 parking stalls and 4 boat parking stalls. This plan would only be possible if there were a through road from Spates Ave. to 1950 Shoreline Drive. Exhibit F - Consists of 8 parking stalls and 7 boat parking stalls with access from Spates Ave. only and a landscape buffer along the 1950 Shoreline Drive lot line. At this time, the application deals only with the transmission shop property, not 1950 Shoreline Drive, therefore, Exhibit F is the plan to be considered. Chairman Kelley asked Zoning Administrator Mabusth to review the ownership history of the property. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that currently R. W. Reutiman is the fee owner and Craig Olson of Tonka Transmission is the Contract for Deed owner and taxpayer. Mr. Toberman has purchased the outstanding contract for deed. Zcning Administrator Mabusth stated that the Hennepin County Highway Dept. has asked that the surface runoff from the property be corrected to be retained on the property and allowed to enter the catch basin on west vide of the County road riqht-of-way at a more controlled grade-•.-d rate. Applicant should provide a drainage plan to adlresr. the surface drainage for the s itv. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 11112 SMITH DAY MARINA CONTINUED Chairman Kelley asked about the signage, lighting and the hours the center will be open. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the signage und lighting plan has been submitted. Applicant plans '_o utilize the present sign on the building and remove the road sign. Lighting will be shielded from residential lot lines as required by code. For more specific information regarding lighting, Mabusth referred to Mr. Love. Mr. Love stated that they plan minimal lighting to meeting the needs for safety and security. Hours of operation are 9 A.M. - 5 P.M. Monday through Saturday, with a possible decrease in hours during the winter. Dan 6 Mary Crear, 1980 Spates Ave., were present and stated they had no problem with the lighting as long as the 61 •,,+rivacy fence is retained. Their main concern is the hope that the property would be routinely mainta:.r;d. They are in favor of the proposal. Mr. Tot erman stated that cleaning up the property was their priority intent. In responee to Chairman Kelley's question, Mr. Love stated they f-It the proposed parking plan would be sufficient. Alan Nettles, 1940 Shoreline Drive, asked what was proposed to be planting within the curbing area along Shoreline Drive. He would like to see some landscaping to present a more rural residential look. Chairman Kelley stated that the type of landscaping is limited because of the sight distance for the Spates Ave. and Shoreline Drive intersection and also noted that certain types of landscaping could not tolerate the winter road salt. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the County will not allow any plantings within the right-of-way of County Rd. 15. The plan calls for a qrass area with a nautical rope motif. Chairman Kelley asked about the height of the keel boats on trailers (excluding the mast) that will be stored for sale. Mr. Love stated that based on the parking plan for 7 boat stalls, stalls 41-4 maximum boat height would be 14', and stalls Y5-7 maximum boat height would be 8'. Boats will be on display uncovered year around. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 19R7 #1112 SMITH BAY MARINA CONTINUED Dan Crear stated that the proposed locations for boat parking would not be a problem. Mary Crear requested that the fence along their lot line be extended to connect with the fence along the 1950 Shoreline Drive lot line, noting that they do not want the the fence along their lot line extended any further towards Spates Ave. than currently exists because it would obstruct their view of the lake. There were no other comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Taylor, to recommend approval of the conditional use permit per staff recommendations and subject to: a) Fence being repaired b) Allowing a maximum of 4 boats 20'-25' to be stored on the property. The remaining 3 boats must be under 20' in length. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0, Abstention 1. Cohen abstained from comment and voting in this application because of his past dealings with Mr. Toberman, which was consistent with his action at the March 16, 1987 meeting. Johnson questioned the issue of the County requesting an additional 7' of right-of-way and how it would affect this proposal. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the City has consistently denied that request because it is at its maximum, as far as the City is concerned, for a scenic highway. Chairman Kelley explained that every time there is a subdivision/application for a property along County Rd. 15, the County request more right-of-way for the future possibility of expanding the road to which the City is opposed. George Rovegno, 2010 Shoreline Drive, arrived after this public hearing was over. He wanted it noted that it appeared to him to be a use variance which is illegal according to code. Chairman Kelley advised Mr. Rovegno to attend the May Council meetinq in which this application will again be discussed. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 91142 SMITH HAY MARINA a YACHT CLUB 1955 SHORELINE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 7t56-8z29 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Present for this matter were Gerald Toberman and Woody Love. Zoning Administrator Mabusth reviewed the major upgrading plan of the entire B-2 property. The proposal includes a single 301x40' principal structure (club house) surrounded by a 10' deck area on the northeast and southeast sides, with a 6' walkway extending to docks on the northeast end and a 4' walkway extending to the docks on the „outheast. She reviewed the variances required of which all were eit.ier no change or less intense that the existing conditions. In response to Chairman Kelley's question regarding the status of the docks permit with the I.MCD - Mr. Love stated the only outstanding issue is the removal of bouys and conversion of slips being discussed with the City and the location of slips being negotiated with the LMCD. Chairman Kelley reviewed the following variances for Planning Commission comments: Lakeshore Setback - Principal structure 50' - variance of 25' Deck structure - 15' - variance of 60' Side Setback to Residential Used Property - Principal structure - 40' - variance of 10' Hardcover - 0-75' - 15,862 s.f. variance of 63.4% (10% improvement in hardcover) 75-250' - 5,100 s.f. (no change from existing) Lot Area = .71 Acre - variance of 1.3 acres Setback for Parking from Street Lot Line - Proposed = 10' - variance of 20' Parking Requirements (6 stalls per 10 slips) - Based on 79 slips - 48 stalls required Proposed - 42 stalls - variance of 6 stall:, •Note: the City has always permitted this marina to use the municipal parking lot on weekends for overflow parking. Chairman Kelley stated that he felt comfortable with approving the variances. Taylor agreed with Chairman Kelley because in each instance they have either maintained the existing variance or improved th• exlsttnq condition. MINUTES OF THE PLANNIMG COMMISSION NESTING HELD MAY 4, 1987 11142 SMITE BAY MAXIMA CONTINUED Bellows feels this is an appropriate use and finds no problems in terms of setback. She however, feels the parking is too tight for proper maneuverability. Additionally, she felt that the Planning Commission could not make a recommendation until a complete plan for the new club house is submitted. She suggested that the Planning Commission proceed with the other issues and conceptually approve the footprint. Councilmember Callahan stated that the Council will not review this application further until an entire commercial site plan has been submitted. In response to Chairman Kelley's question, Mr. Love stated the specific rip -rap plan to protect the shoreline is not available at this time. Chairman Kelley stated that plans pertaining to the shoreline should be submitted with the commercial site plan. Planning Commission discussed allowing i caretaker apartment above the club house. Planning Commission recommended that a caretaker be on site - possibly for the summer months only. Harriet Tourangeau, 2060 Spates Ave., asked about the status of an overflow parking lot on the 1950 Shoreline Drive residential property. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the issue of pernittin4 a parking lot on `hat pr, rty has been t-blmd by Council pending the commerciasite plan. At this time, the overflow parking will be permitted in the municipal parking lot on weekends. Mr. Tcberman stated that with the ccrrent proposal, an overflow corking area may never be needed. There were no other comments from tho public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Taylor, to recommend conceptual approval of the variances required with exception of the variance to the required 48 parking stalls. Motion, Ayes 5, Hays 0. Abstention 1. Cohen ahstained. MINUTES OF THE PIANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 01122 BIG 1SIAND VETERAh'S C BOARD OF GOVERNORS BIG ISLAND RPCORD LOT 7 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PHASE III - CONCEPTUAL REVIEW Present for this mat'.er were Alan Wisdorf, Larry Sharpe, and Joe Backes. Mr. Wisdorf explained that the final development plan Is a combination of three studies to determine what could be done with the camp. He believes that the plan is very grand in scope. The Board of Governors would like to work with staff on a realistic and acceptable plan. The majority of the Planning Commission, of which three are new members; would like to tour the island before further review and recommendation. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that a Council/Planni.g Commission/staff tour is tentatively scheduled for May 15th. Bellows stated she was astounded with the proposed scope of the development plan, mainly because the Veteran's group has been struggling to accomplish the demolition and rehabilitation that currently exists. She is concerned about the economic viability of this development plan and felt that economic information should be submitted to support this plan. Mr. Wisdorf stated that he understands the concern of funding, however, he noted that the City has limited what they can do even if they have the means at this time to accomplish a particular goal (i.e. they currently have the funding and volunteers to paint but do not possess the necessary permit). Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that because all the buildings have been condemned, staff would like to convince them against this total development plan and work with them on a compromise of a summer camp and determine exactly what structures could remain. Mr. Wisdorf stated that they would like approval of scut overnight camping for their work crews during the week in addition to weekends. Presently, they are restricted to only weekends. He at ad they would like to start the permitting process the work they intend to do next summer in order to a.oid delays. Chairman Kelley sungested that they outline the steps they wish t„ rake for next year's work. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4. 1987 81122 BIG ISLAND VETERAN'S CAMP CONTINUED It was moved by Taylor, seconded by Cohen, to table this review pending the Big Island tour. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. 81128 RAINEY ANDERSON 780 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - CLASS II CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST TO BE TABLED Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that applicant has not submitted any additional information, therefore, staff and applicant request that this item be tabled. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Taylor, to table this application. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. #1133 BETTY MINER 3830/3860 RAYSIDE ROAD SUBDIVISION - CLASS I CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Betty Miner and her agent, Larry Langhans, were present for this matter. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that they received the additional survey information indicating no encroachments as previously thought. There were no comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Taylor, to recommend approval of the lot line rearrangement subdivision as proposed. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. i1138 RONALD H. DENSHAR 2821 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:51-9:05 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Ronald Demshar was present for this matter. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the -equest to a) add second story to main body of house which currently has substandard setbacks on both Bides, b) remodel the portion of the house away from t. i lake to create an attached garage requiring 12'x31' addition to house, and revise driveway; and c) construct a ground -level 12' x 24' deck on the lake side with a portion of sidewalk to connect to the existing sidewalk 7 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 #1138 DEMSHAR CONTINUED along side of the house. He reviewed the variances involved as follows: Side Setbacks - 2nd story - right side 5.6' (same as exists) 2nd story - left side 3.4' (same as exists) Addition - right side 9.2' (9.8' exists) Average lakeshore setback encroachment - 18' (same as exists) Hardcover - 0-75' - 3.4% (same as exists) 75-250' 61.7% (52.9% currently ts) Gaffron noted that no comments have i received from the neighbors and staff does not fe__ that the 2nd addition will hinder any of the neighbors view. Mr. Demshar noted that there are currently 50' pine trees on the neighbor's property which obstruct the view. Bellows asked applicant to explain his hardship for keeping the existing garage in addition to the new garage. Mr. Demshar stated that his basement is only 300 s.f., therefore the existing garage is need for additional storage and boat storage. Cohen stated he was uncomfortable with the additional hardcover and setting a precedent. He would consider recommending approval if the existing garage were removed. Chairman Kelley agreed with Cohen noting more storage room would be accomodated with the new 2nd story addition. Mr. Demshar asked if the Planning Commission would be amenable to allowing the existing garage to remain until the new construction is completed. Chairman Kelley felt that retaining the garage until construction was completed would not be a problem. He asked what the actual hardcover calculation would be if garage were removed. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that if garage were removed, the hardcover would increase by approximately 1.5% to otal 54.4% 75-250' hardcover instead of the proposed 61.7%. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION NESTING HELD MAY 4, 1987 f1138 DE14SHAR CONTINUED Assistant- Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted the photos submitted by the applicant of the lakeshore which indicate an obvious need for some type of repair. He asked applicant what his intent was for lakeshore repair. Mr. Uemshar stated he intends to eventually replace what exists. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted lakeshore repair work may or may not require a conditional use permit depending on exactly what changes cpplicant proposes. He noted that if a conditional use permit were required, it would involve a separate application. There were no comments from the public and the public hearing was clostd. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Cohen, to recommend approval subject to: 1) 54.4% maximum approved hardcover in 75-250' 2) existing garage removed by May 1, 1988 3) no additional hardcover will be approved on this property Motion, Ayes 6, Hays 0. #1139 JIM i BONNIE LEAR 2525 DUNWOODY AVENUE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:07-9:21 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Jim Lear and his general contractor, Mike Schroeder, were present for this matter. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request to construct an addition to an existing. residence which would extend to within 4' of the existing garage. Because the code requires a 10' separation between a principal building and accessory structure, applicants propose to attach the two structures by constructing a roof between them. He reviewed the following variances and facts: Hardcover - 0-75' 2.42% - no change proposed 75-250' - 28.7% existinq - proposal is for equal tradeoff (no net increase) 250-500'- 13.17% exist4,q - no change proposed MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 41139 LEAR CONTINUED Side Setback - The proposal is to attach the existing garage to the house via a covered walkway. The existing garage is 6.7% from the side lot line. TecLnically, there is no change to existing structure or existing side setback, except that what was a detached garage will now be attached, still encreschl—ng into the required -f0 sre setback. Average Lakeshore Setback - There is no additional distance encroachment over and above the existing 28' average setback line encroachment, but there is a 3 degree reduction in sideward views from the house to the south. Those views are already screened with existing vegetation so that the additional view encroachment is insignificant in staff's opinion. Bill Hultgren of 2545 Dunwoody, neighbor to the south, stated that he has reviewed the plans and has no objections. However, his only concern is any future use of the garage which is built too close to the property line. He would like some assurance that the garage and upper garage area will not be turned into living quarters. His reason is that it would be lees than 20' from their main bedroom area. Mr. Lear stated that he does not intend on using this area as living quarters and understands Mr. Hultgren's position. He intends to sheetrock, insulate and provide a small space heater in the garage which will be use strictly as garage use in addition to keeping dogs inside during the day. Regarding the area above the garage, he plans to use it for a small train hobby room. Mike Schroeder reviewed the interior and exterior plans. There -e no other comments from the public and the publi ring was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, to recommend approval subject to: 1. No additional hardcover will be allowed on the property. 2. The garage and upper garage area will not be plumbed nor be used as full time living space. 10 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 #1139 LEAN CONTINUED Side Setback - The proposal is to attach the existing garage to the house via a covered walkway. The existing garage is 6.71 from the side lot line. Technically, there is no change to existing structure or existing side setback, except that what was a detached garage will now be attached, still encroach into the required 10 s de setback. Average Lakeshore Setback - There is no additional distance encroachment over and above the existing 28' average setback line encroachment, but there is a 3 degree reduction in sideward views from the house to the south. Those views are already screened with existing vegetation so that the additional view encroachment is insignificant in staff's opinion. Bill Hultgren of 2545 Dunwoody, neighbor to the south, stated that he has reviewed the plans and has no objections. However, his only concern is any future use of the garage which is built too close to the property line. He would like some assurance that the garage and upper garage area will not be turned into living quartere. His reason is that it would be less than 20' from their main bedroom area. Mr. Lear stared that he does not intend on using this area as livini quarters and understands Mr. Hultgren'. position. He ietends to sheetrock, insulate and provide a small space teeter in the garage which will be use strictly as garage use in addition, to keeping dogs inside during the day. Regarding the area above the garage, he plana to use it for a small train hobby room. Mike Schroeder reviewed the interior and exterior plans. There were no other comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman kelley, to recommend approval subject to: 1. No additional hardcover will be allowed on the property. 2. The garage and upper garage area will not b.• plumbed nor be used as full time living space. 10 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 t1139 LEAN CONTINUED Side Setback - The proposal is to attach the existing garage to the house via a covered walkway. The existing garage is 6.7% from the side lot line. Technically, there is no change to existing structure or existing side setback, except that what was a detached garage will now be attached, still encroac� into the required 1Tie setback. Average Lakeshore Setback - There is no additional distance encroachment over and above the existing 28' average setback line encroachment, but there is a 3 degree reduction in sideward views from the house to the south. Those views are already screened with existing vegetation so that the additional view encroachment is insignificant in staff's opinion. Bill Hultgren of 2545 Dunwoody, neighbor to the south, stated that he has reviewed the plans and has no objections. However, his only concern is any future use of the garage which is built too close to the property line. He would like some assurance that the garage and upper garage area will not be turned into living quarters. His reason is that it would be less than 20' from their main bedroom area. Mr. Lear stated that he does not intend on using this area as living quarters and understands Mr. Hultgren's position. He intends to sheetrock, insulate and provide a small space heater in the garage which will be use strictly as garage use in addition to keeping dogs inside during the day. Regarding the area above the garage, he plans to use it for a small train hobby room. Make Schroeder reviewed the interior and exterior plans. There were no other comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. :t was moved by Chairman Kelley, to recommend approval •subject to: 1. No additional hardcover will be allowed on the property. 2. The garage and upper garage area will not be plumbed nor be used as full time living space. I0 MINUTES OF THE PLAMNIMG COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 41139 LEAR CONTINUED Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated he had concerns with controllinc the future use of the garage once it is attached to the main residence. He suggested another alternative of granting a 4' variance between accessory structure and residence, therefore not connecting the two structures but providing firewall as needed, which would eliminate any future problems. Mr. Schroeder stated that they would be in favor of Gaffron's suggestion because that is what they originally intended. Mr. Lear concurred. Bellows questioned the viability and expense involved in £irewalling the garage with a gambrel roof thus creating a fire hazard. She noted that in order to avoid precedent setting, is should be stated in the resolution that this variance is being granted only because of an error in the original survey which resulted in the garage being placed too close to the lot line. Chairman Kelley withdrew his previous motion. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Johnson, to recommend approval of hardcover, side setback, and average setback variances as proposed, finding that side setback variance is being granted only because garage was constructed too close to the lot line in error, subject to the condition that the garage area may become heated space but may not be plumbed and may not be used as living quarters. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. #1140 TOM BERTHIAUME 3035 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:33-9:34 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailirg was noted. Tom Berthiaume was present for this matter. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request to construct a 2nd story bedroom and bathroom addition over the existing garage which is 7.1 feet from the side lot line and staff finds there will be no view encroachment from the addition. Staff recommends approval. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Conen, to recommend approval as proposed. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 i1141 KARLTON GRPLER/MARIA IVES 1955 FAGERNESS POINT ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 9:34-9:57 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request for hardcover, lakeshore setback, and average lakeshore setback variances to construct a tuckunder garage and ground level deck. He reviewed the following facts: Hardcover: 0-75' - 14.2% existing, 19.9% proposed 75-250' - 37.7% existing, 32.5% proposed (net decrease overall of 121 s.f, on property) Structure: a) Proposed 350 s.f. deck, ground level, all within 0-75' setback zone. b) Proposed 1--story plus tuckunder garage on street side of house. Proposal is to removal existing garage/shed/driveway and replace with new driveway. Karlton Gempler and Maria Ives were present for this matter. Mr. Gempler showed the proposed plans noting that initially they proposed a 2nd story addition in the application which they have now eliminated. Taylor questioned the afforded lake view from the proposed ground level deck due to the trees and shrubs. Mr. Gempler stated that one tree has to be removed because it has dutch elm and he plans to cut back the existing shrris. Applicant was advised that a conditional use permit is required for any grading within the 0-75' and that any trees in excess of 6" may not be removed without a permit issued by City staff and must be replaced with like replacements (with exception of dead trees). Planning Commission discussed any alternatives of 350 s.f. deck in the 0-75' zone. Mr. Gempler suggested the use of sand or wood chips used under deck with no plastic allowed. Assistant Zoning Administratrator Gaffron noted that there were two instances on Fagerness Point in which this was approved, however, Council has consistently rejef-ted this alternative in the past two years. 1l MINUTES OF TNN PLANNING COMMISSION MRRTING BSI,D NAY 4, 1987 #1141 GNMPLNR/IVNS CONTINUED Johnson felt applicant was entitled to have a deck to enjoy the lake and there is no other location for placement. Chairman Kelley felt the deck was excessive and suggested the alternative of allowing a widened stairway to be installed to allo use of the two proposed glass doors that exist from the lake side of the house a few feet above ground level. Bellows and Cohen concurred. Mr. Gempler stated that with no deck, entertaining would have tQ be provided on the grass area, and after a time, no grass area would be left. Taylor suggested and compromise between the stairs and a 350 s.f. deck. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron adjusted the 0-75' hardcover calculation if deck were only 230 s.f.as follows: final 17.3% hardcover as opposed to the proposed 19.98, base' on the 23' distance between outside of proposed dons and a 10' width. John Waldron, 1951 Concordia St, adjacent property owner was present for this review, but made no comments. There were no other comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Taylor, seconded by Johnson, to recommend approval subject to reducing the size of the ground level deck to 230 s.f. to be constructed with a sand base with no plasti.; liner in order to maintain absorbtion capacity of ground below deck. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 3. Kelley, Bellows, and Cohen voted nay because no hardship was proven to justify the size of deck proposed, but they would be willing to allow the widened stairway as suggested. Motion resulted in a split vote. 41109 CURTIS JOHNSON 2024 & ADrdOOD ROAD VARIANCE REQUHST FOR ADDITIONAL REVIEW Curtis Johnson and Pam killette were present for this matter. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that Mr. Johnson requests Planning Commission give additional consideration to his proposed placement of a second story deck past the average house setback line because he feels there is a distinct —�r3sTip placed on his 13 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Mum MAY 4, 1987 #1109 JOHNSON CONTINUED property due to the 6' high solid ft a extending along the deck of his neighbor to the south. Mr. Johnson submitte-' photos of the adjacent homes which indicate the house to the south has a second story deck extending 6' and has a 6' wall/fence extending out approximately 15-17' along the side which drastically reduces applicant's view. In response to Chairman Kelley's question, Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that the 6' fence was never permitted as such technically they cannot have the 6 fence there. Regarding requiring removal of the fence, because staff cannot verify when the fence was place, Gaffron is unsure that the City can legally require its removal. Chairman Kelley felt a decision could not be made until it was known whether the fence could or could not be required to be removed. Taylor questioned whether the Planning Commission had an accurate depiction to make their recommendation relative to the physical location of the 6' long fence, and if not, the average house setback may in fact be closer to the lake giving the applicant more room to work with. Bellows noted her concerns with leap frog encroachment into the average lakeshore setback area. Planning Commission member Johnson recommended using the 1st story deck at 2016 Shadywood and the 2nd story deck at 2032 Shadywood to determine the average deck setback for a�,plicants deck at 2024 Shadywood. Staff recommended allowing applicants house to be placed up to the average setback line and allowing a 6' maximum second story deck past the average setback line. After discussion, it was moved by Taylor, seconded by Johnson, to revise their recommendation from the April 20th meeting as follows: House must be behind average house setback line. Second story deck may extend 6' further lakeward or up to the "average second story deck setback line", whichever is more restrictive. Motion, Ayes 4, Hays 1, Abstention 1. Cohen voted nay. Bellows abstained. Councilmember Callahan stated that he did not agree with the method determining the average setback. 14 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1987 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Taylor requested to amend the minutes regarding his comment during Application #1119 Duncan MacMillan to read: "However, he felt the nature of the hardship, protecting the safety and well being of the applicants, was not an acceptable legitimate hardship ... It was moved by Taylor, seconded by Chairman Kelley, to approve the Minutes of the April 20, 1987 Planning Commission meeting as amended. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE Planning Commission member Brown was appointed to attend the May 26, 1987 Council meeting. ADJOURNMENT 10:33 P.M. The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 10:33 P.M. MINUT:S OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 4, 1967 ATTENDANCE 7:30 P.M. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chairman Kelley, Bellows, Taylor, Johnson, and Brown. Cohen arrived at 7:46 P.M. Hanson was absent. The following represented the City staff: Building a Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning 6 Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Record=r Peterson. Councilmember Callahan was also present. 41112 SMITH BAY MARINA 6 YACHT CLUB 1960 SHORELINE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Present for this matter were Gerald Toberman and woody Love. Zoning Administrator Mabusth reviewed that at the March 16, 1987 meeting, Planning Commision unanimously agreed that the proposed boat sales/service center use would be a less intense or less non -conforming use than the existing transmission shop. Planning Commission asked the applicant to submit a more detailed site plan of the operation. She reviewed the two site plans submitted: Exhibit E - Consists of 14 parking stalls and 4 boat parking stalls. This plan would only be possible if there were a through road from Spates Ave. to 1950 Shoreline Drive. Exhibit F - Consists of 8 parking stalls ane 7 boat parking str.11s with access from Spates Ave. only and a landscape buffer along the 1950 Shoreline Drive lot line. At this time, the apple. !ion deals only with the transmission shop property, 1950 ;horeline Drive, there.ore, Exhibit F is the ply be considered. Chairman Kelley asked Zoning Admi. 'rator Mabusth to review the ownership history of the p.. arty. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained ti.." currently R. W. Reutiman is the fee owner and Craig 0 eon of Tonka Transmission is the Contract for Deed owner and taxpayer. Mr. Toberman has purchased the outstand-ng contract for deed. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the Hennepin County Highway Dept. has asked that the surface runoff from the property be corrected to be retained on the property and allowed to enter the catch basin on west side of the County road riyht-of-way at a more controlled graduated rate. Applicant should provide a drainage plan to address U� surface drainage for the site. Sidnry Nr,nhnrd Rrhm,, dfuetr, th thier iU jI PARE, MINNFEeTA tEIIE FE LEPNRMF 17/it1/ May 7, 1987 Mark Bernhertson, Administrator Orono City Hall P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mark: I respectfully request that you distribute the enclosed copies of an article that ran in the May 7th Star and Tribune, to the members of the Planninr Commisa!on and Council and any other interested wembe of the Village. Thank you, Sin• rely, R:_.RS CONSTRUCTION CO. President SR/mf cc: Steve Pilau. Member. of 111annfnq Commission 6 Council Communityapofis Star TtaxsdaY South Hennepin - )ne pages inside aulty Brooklyn Park septic Wanks create ire Sewers for residents in Riverside, t5.a✓o other additions are years away ., Durk kink ..,tf Writer .,s and Lynn Newman won't drink .,I, water, because it smells like 'wage. . I11C and Debby Olson watch the wage bubble up in their front yard .lien company puts a heavy demand .0 Ihar toilet. •.arse and Judy Smith own a wash - machine. but they arl 25 leads of .,h to a coin laucdry each week. If didn't. their septic tank would :k up into the basement, tic three families live in the noM- ..,um tip of Brooklyn Pali, the avcr ude Addition. where all is lush .rid green and quietL twt It's not all peaceful —PIC In Riverside and two adjacent subdivisions are angry and frustrated over faulty septic systems and a city that doesn't plan on installing sewers until the year 2000 or later. Residents, city officials and a soil specialist say the septic systems arc failing hecause a high water bible prevents Proper drainage. The homes were built about 15 years ago on marshy land. When the houses were newer. the septic systems functioned well. resi- dents say, but in resent years the tanks have begun to malfunction. Homeowners wont' that the leaking systems will conumintaw their wells, but tests of drinking water show that hasn't happened, said Tom Heenan, Brooklyn Park sanitarian. After a year of protests and pressure from residents, city officials hired a comulum to test sent to see if the systems needed to be replaced tmme- diarely by sewers. Results arc espedcd al the end of next wmk, and consultant Steve Schemers of S-P Testing says he'll probably recommend that sewers be installed suorwr than called for in city plans. l'hat's good news for many residents. but it may force the city to abandon its 2kyearold plan, which doesn't call for city utilities for another 18 years. "They shouldn't completely ignore us." said Judy Smith, 4000 Sunset Rd., whose septic system oarted mal- functioning eight days a:mr she and her husband moved into the house las: year. They pay $65 every three weeks to have the septic tank Pumped out. In rainy, seasons it has to be done every week. Healthy sys- tems need pumpingevery two years. %I the Illwni. alln Willow Rd big patch III brown, burned -raw guv shows where the septic iiwun pills its sontenb. "Even !hough you haw a u,,hkm, then .,a i m.,h he, lr going to do for you unlm you rc lun of their Ionic, plan.' Dcbb, uh,n, sand "O•n react are, going up Al the time. but we're not getting an) Ivinv - fiks" City officials, howemq Wald residents knee: the area wasn't scheduled for drvelopntent for 20 years when They taught their houses, and they us it's nel the my's restictr dtq u. With, earl. resndenl's prnblem "The claWm is that we should go Ia and bad those people out — lurk. stock and barrel," said Gan Hers eiy planner. "Hut there is w,u thing as 'kt the buyer beware He sides. the resldems aren't all in fa,,. of getting city uulcul . especlan, thou who¢ septic unks arc .orkuµ bl oprnuw rM • -. mmr]I Maasw ruw" p IwaunWp v, les w+..i .. I aWd r,uh The WnllYrL (e'.r Yll nu hur.,, ncft .,I. ,uyUw YuI.x, m an tea lhal due, I lu,t tp, In, ..J Iternan lichen, (..m We'd II.,,, . muted W.A.. in in, ne,p n.n..d uW Way 'Its kaw .. lie awl. .ncr ,Ipum ran m,.0 ..l IN ncyM.., I ,ssuR a m,.e c.ocn. w,e Wept. nwem ]Ihnme., uW IN, WWW d",. ticks �n 1". „aem arc ui W lira a m_w ehwtl a 1�1 .1w.c srou uJ k"cl Yi Ihr, plum pr,gr: h. c won III, -aki ubk n nl`11 011i Is ..N 1.nI Hum St iral Bel'; ,pcndma .ti. W,mt nl n.111 raIu,.. I n't. 1n nitre tl.. ,IH wiMl ,n,uil male. ,run Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commissinn 4430AK STREET • EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 • (612) 4745539 TO: ALL LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMISSION DIRECTORS FROM: Holly Hansen DATE: May 11, 1987 RE: ORDINANCE AMENDMENT AND ANNUAL ELECTIONS_ MEETING - TUESDAY, MAY 19. 1987 - 5:00 p.m. Please make ever effort to attend the meetingreferred to above. It is imperative that the LMCCC amend its Ord nance to comply with Minnesota State law. The Ordinance Amendment became necessary due to the Transfer of Ownership from Dowden Communications Inc. to Dowden Cable Partners, L.P., which as you recall, occurred December 1986. At the present time, the LMCCC is not in compliance with the State and needs to amend its Franchise. We attempted to do this at our February meeting, but did not have a sufficient quorum to vote on the matter. For amendments to the Franchise, the LMCCC is required by its Joint Powers Agreement to have a representation of at least 2/3 of the votes, represented by at least ten cities. This means each city needs to send more than one representative. The Proposed Amendments to the Ordinance were sent to you in February, prior to the February meeting. Please become familiar with the Proposed Amendments and bring your copy to the upcoming meeting. I will be in touch with all City Managers regarding this meeting and either they or I will attempt to contact each une of you by phone prior to the meeting as an addition- al reminder to this notice. PLEASE ATTEND THIS KETING LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION TUESDAY, MAY 19, 1987 5:00 P.M. EXCELSIOR STUDIO U E N D A 1. CALL TO ORDER I1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES II1. PUBLIC HEARING IV. REPORTS A. OFFICERS B. ADMINISTRATOR C. LEGAL COUNSEL D. COWDEN CABLESYSTEMS V. ELECTIONS V1. UNFINISHED BUSINESS VII, NEW BUSINESS VIII. ADJOURN MINUTES LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 5:00 P.M., EXCELSIOR T.V. STUDIO TUESDAY, APRIL 21, 1987 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Olds called the April 21, 1987 meeting to order at 5:01 P.M. ROLL CALL Directors Present Others Present Jim Olds Holly Hansen Dennis Haggerty Mary Smith Jerry Roehl Shelly Trinka Tom Anderson Sally Koenecke Lesley Hughes -Seamans II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Notion 4.21.87.1: Anderson moved, seconded by Roehl, to approve the March 17, 1987 minutes. Motion carried unanimously. III. REPORTS A. TREASURER Motion 4.21.87.2 Just Claims: Roehl moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve just claims as written on Exhibit A. B. CHAIRMAN Chairman Olds spoke briefly about a meeting he had with Administrator Hansen and Mary Smith of Dowden, they discussed the technical ,. - Dowden had conducted. Illegal hook-ups are quite high, the pence, Cages differ in each city. C. ADMINISTRATOR Administrator Hansen info med the Commission that the majority of Bonds and Insurance Certificates have come in and been accounted for. Hansen reported that she has begun writing a newspaper column. It is being published by three (3) newspapers, The Sailor, South Shore Weekly News, and the Poineer/Laker. "he column consists of activities going on in the studios,Excelsior, Mound, Orono and Wayzata. Hansen is using the column to inform the public to get them interested and involved in cable production and viewing. PUBLIC ACCESS: Administrator Hansen informed the Commission of a contest coming up, it is called the Slate Awards. The Slate Awards is a seven (7) County wide contest, it costs $10.00 per entry. Administrator Hansen will be s.bmitting a program in this contest. Administrator Hansen informed the Commission that she and Mary Smith of Dowden will be moating with a representative from the Carver County Civil Defense, to talk about the a:tivation of the emergency alert over -ride on the cable systom. D. DOWDEN CABLE SYSI"I' Mary Smith of Do.d.n her report with the COMMISSicn. She explalned that a ma7.,: It? of 'he disconnects are due to Residents who have moved or arc m,.v1n4. Mar}Smith also noted that homes passed is u,1,002. due 'o new oonstru."tron and the technical audit ver if i,'etiun. LMCCC MINUTES page two D. DOWDEN CABLE SYSTEMS - cont. Mary Smith stated that Dowden will be mailing post cards to advertise cable. Dowden is hoping to interest Residents who have cable available in their area to become subscribers. IV. MAY ELECTIONS Chairman Olds informed the Commission that LMCCC needs to hold elections for new officers. The new term will start July 1, 1987. Administrator Hansen has contacted some members of the Commission. Dean Johnson and Barb Brancel of Shorewood are interested in running for the Executive Committee. Jerry Roehl is interested in being the Treasurer again and Lesley Hughes -Seamans for secretary or another Office. Hansen will be contacting the nominating committee for more ideas. V. ACCESS CLASSES Administrator Hansen illustrated several items needed for the studio which is included on Exhibit B. Hansen explained to the Commission that a f; nal price was given on the field VCR of $1,138.00. Hansen explained that the studio has two cameras but only one VCR deck, another VCR fleck is needed for the use of the second camera. Motion 4.21.87.3; Anderson moved, seconded by Roehl, to approve pz,nrent of the six items on Exhibit B, with the printer not exceeding $500.00. Motion carried unanimously. Hansen also coordinated two proposals for the Commission which are also on Exhibit B. Administrator Hansen requested Fritz Coulter's hourly salary raised from $5.00 per hour to $5.50 per hour, and increase his hours from 15 hours to 20 hours per week for the purpose of instructing access classes. Hansen informed the Commission that Fritz should get paid $11.00 per hour for teaching the access classes. It would cost at least that to hire an instructor to teach the classes. The Commission would pay for 1/2 of the $11.00 and the other half would be raised through tuition fees from the classes. Hansen explained to the Commission that she would like to advertise for the classes by using flyers or a press release. Mary Smith of Dowden suggested to Administrator Hansen that she should invent a theme for these classes to interest the public. The classes will alternate from field classes to studio classes. Motion 4.21.87.4: Anderson moved, seconded by Roehl, to increase Fritz: Coulter's salary to $5.50 per hour for the 15 hours spent on normal duties and include an additional 5 hours for access class activities. Also, change Fritz Coulter's title to "Assistant Access Coordinator" and include $.22 per mile for mileage. Motion carried unanimously. VI. CHANNEL. ALLOCATION Chairman Olds reported to the Commission that the four (4) access channels are still available for future use for Putlic. Educational, and Governrsc•nta' (P.E.G.I purposes. This item was brought to the Commissions attention due to thy, changes in channels 19 and 21. Channel 19 ch,mged from a Community Channel to I leased channel and Channel 21 was o leased ,h.1nnc1 .mrl IF now CFN. Channel P remains a I'u blic/r:vc n�mcri:al and Ch.nnr,ol _C r,rmalns a Puhlic/Fduca- rurnal �-h"nnel. LMCCC MINUTES page three VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Chairman Olds informed the Commission that a Public Hearing needs to be set up to complete the Transfer of Ownership to approve the amended Ordinance due to the Transfer of Ownership. Chairman Olds hopes the Commission can reach a quorum at the May meeting as a quorum representing two thirds of the Commissions votes is required. VIII. NEW BUSINESS Administrator dansen informed the Commission of a conference coming in June. It will be held at Madison, Wisconsin. The cost for the conference is $105.00 per person if less than three people attend. This cost does not include food or hotels. Administrator Hansen and Dean Johnson are interested in attending the conference. XI: ADJOURNMENT Motion 4.21.87.5: Anderson moved, seconded by Roehl, to adjourn the April 21, 1987 meeting at 6:20 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Shelly Trinka EXHIBIT B PURCHASE REQUESTS 4/21/87 ITEM ACCOUNT AMOUNT Bookkeeping software Off. supplies $ 100 Hordprocessing software " " 125 Printer for computer " " 300-500 (estimate) Video Handbook Field VCR - JVC BR6200 Insurance for field VCR (above) PROPOSAL - FRITZ COULTER Misc. video 50 Equip. fund /i35 1IvOW (estimate) Insurance 100 - To give Fritz Coulter title of "Assistant Access Coordinator" - To raise Fritz Coulter's salary to $5.50/hour (presently $5.00/hour) - To increase Fritz Coulter's hours to 20 houra/wk (presently 15 hours/wk) - To reimburse Fritz Coulter for mileage at 22c per mile for business purposes (If above salary changes were made effective week of 4/27 , this would represent 36 weeks @ $110 for weeks remaining in 1987 $3,960.) PROPOSAL - VIDEO CLASSES THROUGH LMCCC - propose that LMCCC run its own classes in addition to Community Services. - Field 6 Editing Class: 4 times at 3 hems - 12 hours instruction - Studio Production Class: ' 1." " " " - Miscellaneous special classes: 1 class at 3 hours - 3 hours instruction Note: Community Services has cancelled several classes as they require 7-8 students to run a class, Spring classes have been cancelled. Cmty. Svc. pays instructors $11.00/hour. - If LMCCC ran classes and paid instructor @ $11.00/hour: $5.50 to be sponsored by LMCCC through salaried position, and $5.50 to be raised through tuition fee. - If LMCCC charged $15.00 per student for 1.1 hours of Snstruc�:ion, a class could run with a minumum of 4 students, rep,esenting $60.00 of tuition fees. - If LMCCC charged $5.00 per student for special 3 hour courses, a class could run with a mInumum of 3 students, representing S15.00 of tuition fees. ORONO ►-POLICE OEPAR i MENT FOLLOW UP/CONTINUATION REPORT COMRYN.NL -- •DME55 �DDIIIONaL CIIiN501 DIIfN - YRUGRl55 UI IIIV [$iIWlIDN5. 11f.. I?t/ND Fog iNr 5#~J) �frfr YiwNEQS FIPF�- vD __ iuM(c _ ,tdE tJLJ . Na) RPi(,H-Mo /YJ,tJ 55r12. TNE<C OEolcz �'A✓e' ,r9_ C.A Gt .__.FENCED -/� 3oge-K D. SHE c,/�G✓ An/__�✓ -_it�e �zy �aw,Fl4f�16,�1 -� IS l/i Sflr=i'/r'�_.1Q5-G✓EGL. %���_��G,�/N� KITH _ 1JR LILY of 7 _r9 ��NE._i9Ni�Rt /IvsPi%�r� J woS /ZF�fSSU/2,PEY? —/>_ AN/MAc c✓ouL[7 t3 T+e Z>t-s (< IN c.o2cc�RArJ P� c.�f oF��t:. ors wAs ki,e q_cc G//A,r?I�FS �FiRT !./EIZcr" /NC-u/I,fE� _SLNcE ihf� /i�!Mw� LL/VIS RFt�(IE/}FW�`A -'-'Fif4T Sr. £UGJL__FU2_ -rNlS- _ l�oC�,_ r#LL X,5Tc1 /E'3 / SS U F-3 j}l/ S C NEC K. T? it S 4i✓I C JF 7NEY QEcE/✓cam CUSTODY of Tr+c poG/--_S=- [�G 5 NP nl6- Has rSc-E-aJ 's SNlfikE CLp/�_ FoeZ S/-IoKT. -f Co�yaQ --- �% �A 1tULaA � A Pill TO: CHIEF KILBO, .FFICER HENSEL FROM: OFFICER ENGLISH DATE: May 7, 1987 SUBJ: Recognition of Reserves and Secretarial Staff _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ The Orono Police Department has now solved a burglary to residence on Orono Orchard Rd and also several thefts from the locker rooms at the Orono High School. These matters could not have been resolved without the assistance of the following reserves who gave a great deal of time and effort to these cases: Pete Achey Rick Denneson C.J. Gonsior Randy O'Brien Natalie welch On both cases, the reserves were called out with little notice in terms of time. They arrived at the police department to assist Officer Cornick and myself in about the same amount of time they were called. Several search warrants were conducted, surveillance was conducted, and many arrests were made. The reserves participated in all facets of these cases in a very professional and expedient manner - very simply, the cases could have not bean solved without their help. The true test of our reserve unit is how our reserves perform when given a variety of (asks in which thev must act given little information and assist regular officers on an independent basis. These reserves performed to my every expectation: in a word, they were great! I also would like to thank both Sue and Carol for their support on all the typinq and research items which I asked them to Perform. their work was co^Diete, accurate, and without delay (despite the urusually high work load already at the office). I right add that sue types one heck of a Great search warrant! My greatest thanks to all involved! i DATE: May 13, 1987 TO: Officer English and Reserve Officers Rick Denneson, "ete Achev, C.J. Gonsior, Randy O'Brien, and Natalie Welch FROM: Chief Kilbo SUBJECT: Letter of Appreciation On March 24, 1987, the Orono Police Department received a call from a resident stating she had seen a strange vehicle enter a aarage at 40 Orono Orchard Road. Officer English requested the aid of 5 Res- erve Officers to set up a stake out and approximately 2 hours later a blue Blazer drove in and then left to go into a neighboring drivewav, at this time, encountering the stake out vehicle. As a follow uo, it was established that 6 juveniles and 2 vouno adults were responsible for and charged with burglary to that residence. Seven search warrants were conducts' with the assistance of, the Reserve Officers who acted in a very professional and expedient manner.. In the words of Officer English, "this case could not have been silved without their help". It should be noted that Officers English and Cornick also performed in an excellent manner and as a result of the buralary arrest, were able to solve a theft of jewelr- from the Orono Hiah School which involved 2 of the juveniles from t-rglary. A great deal of follow up work in this case resulted in 3 in both cases. The department also would 1 I recognize Sue Bobzien and Carol Hansing for their typing and researc. olved in the case which was completed without delay despite the unub ily hinh work load due to the early spring. I appreciate the efforts of all the people involved in these cases. F......., , City of ORONO On the North Sbare of Lake Mrnn'-taoka Police Department May 11, 1987 •+�(�,' 1 ✓� Merle Glauvitz 450 West 6th Street Cokato, MN 55321 Dear Mr. Glauvitz, First, I would like to take a moment to apologize for the slow response we have shown you in handling the damage to property incident you reported on 4/25/87. In the orocess of trying to sort out what has transpired, the boys in the vehicle you followed claimed to have no knowledge of having thrown any objects at your vehicle and are telling me that y were the party that was harrassinq them. I am in need c obtaining a statement from you clearly outlining what transpired in an effort to sort out what happened where and when to determ+ie whether or not I will be able to criminally charge the bo,, for the damage to your vehicle. I am enclosing a statement form for your use or if you could stop by the Orono Police Departme� on wePnesday, 5/13/87, between the hours of 11 am and 7 pm, I .mould be willing to speak to you and record a statement if that would be preferable. Should you not be able to respond to me prior to the 13th of May, please have further conversations with Lt. nary Cheswick as I will be out of town for approx. 10 days. Sincerely, Kurt Erickson, Lt. Orono Police Department KE:sb TO: Chief Kilbo, Lt. Cheswick, and Lt. Erickson FROM: Officer Mary Hensel DATE: May 9, 1987 SUBJ: Officer Friendly Phase III Burger Kino in Long Lake I will be working Phase III of the Officer Friendly Program this week beginning Monday, May 11 through Thursday, May 14. I will be working basically 8:00 to 4:00 Monday throuah wednesdev and then 9:00 to 3:30 on Thursday. I will be discussing seat belt safety, bike safety, and the squad car. I will also be handing out certificates and junior badges. Law Enforcement Days for Ridgedale will be on May 16th and 17th. A couple of reserves and I will be at Ridgedale on these days. we will need a squad car for this event. Our demonstration will consist or the Heart Start, several crime prevention pamphlets, reserve recruitment and Officer Friendly. If we have room, we will also bring the weapons display. Rick Denneson has expressed an interest in wearing his C.S.O. uniform instead of his reserve uniform for public awareness. An opinion on this? I have been to Burger King several times and spoke with the managers about the juvenile "hanginq out." problem. I told the manager this eve,ing that we could work it out in two ways. One is that we would respond when we were called. The other would be for someone from Burger Kina to write the police dept. a letter requesting patrol of the area and to give authority to the police to "kick out" juveniles that appear to be loitering. r? manager said that he would prefer the latter of the solutions ar.o would work on aettinq tie letter written. 'MaA ao �9g7 %MX V ,.Q U TV (� cif' �, Mt' cI ACt -.-1�,• 'o ,��,cca LPt�.1 .._ �/.aa ./i ..ti ^Ctrf.�., r 44 Let L,c—.ft�✓ i-n7-r i:,<�,t u:: s.<.✓,f�.t.-n: ^-.u` cjy1. •+•A �c .• to wtf �� .J CV ��/.N +. � IL.t-n L� %-r�.el .tL'-Q.'Lf :l.Flaf+•� 1 �