HomeMy WebLinkAboutProject PacketPUBLIC COMMENTS
None
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, February 26, 2007
7:0D o'clock p.m.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
vis. #06-3231 WILLIAM DAMPIER, 3550 IVY PLACE -VARIAN CE -RESOLUTION
NO. 5579
Bremer moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5579, a Resolution granting
variances and amending the hardcover variance and site plan approved in Resolution No. 4487 for
the property located at 3550 Ivy Place. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ·
#07-3260 ROGER O'SHAUGHNESSY, 1265 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD -
VARIANCE -RESOLUTION NO. 5580
Bremer moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5580, a Resolution granting a
variance for the property located at 1265 Bracketts Point Road. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
Q #07-3263 CONCEPT LANDSCAPING FOR MITCH OLSON, 3275 CARMAN ROAD -
\eifp -RESOLUTION NO. 5581
Bremer moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5581, a Resolution granting a
Conditional Use Permit and a hardcover variance for the property located at 3275 Carman Road.
VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
*8. MYRLEWOOD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT EXTENSION -
RESOLUTION NO.5582
Bremer moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5582, a Resolution requesting a
six-month extension of the Metropolitan Council review period for the Myrtlewood Comprehensive
Plan Amendment. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
PAGE3
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, February 12, 2007
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(5. #06-3240 CITY OF ORONO ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1 -DEFINITIONS OF
"BASEMENT" AND "STORY", Continued) .
White thanked Mr. Schoenzeit for providing his input and that the Council and Staff would take his
suggestions into consideration.
Schoenzeit commended the Staff on the City's website.
Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to adopt ORDINANCE NO; 37, Third Series, an Ordinance
Amending Chapter 78 of the Orono Municipal Code by Amending Section 78-1: Definitions
Related to Determinations of Basements and Stories. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
*6. #06-3242 YUNKER ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF OF DAVID AND BETSY
WYERHAEUSER, 1540 FOX STREET -CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -RESOLUTION NO.
5575
Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5575, a Resolution granting a
conditional use permit for the property located at 1540 Fox Street. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
*7. #07-3253 JENNIFER AND CHARLIE COGBILL, 1590 LONG LAKE BOULEVARD -
VARIAN CE -RESOLUTION NO. 5576
Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5576, a Resolution granting a
side-yard setback variance for the property located at 1590 Long Lake Boulevard. VOTE: Ayes 4,
Nays 0.
8. #07-3260 ROGER O'SHAUGHNESSY, 1265 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD -VARIAN CE
Susan Steinwall, Attorney-at-Law, appeared on behalf of Roger O'Shaughnessy.
Murphy inquired what impact this application would have on County Road 6.
Gaffron stated if Council approves the application, Staff would prepare findings that would set forth that
this property is a unique situation and that the fence is very opaque and of a light color. Gaffron stated
the City's fence ordinance can be interpreted differently and that perhaps the language should be amended
slightly in the future.
McMillan noted this is a lakeshore lot, which helps make it a unique situation.
Bremer inquired whether any of the fence is located within the 7 5 foot setback.
Gaffron stated the fence does not extend into the 75-foot setback.
Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to direct Staff to draft an approval resolution for Application
#07-3260, Roger O'Shaughnessy, 1265 Bracketts Point Road, based on the findings that this is a
lakeshore lot abutting a major thoroughfare, the fence is less than 25 percent opaque, is five feet tall
rather than the allowed six feet, and has adequate landscaping or screening around the fence.
PAGE 10 of 14
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, February 12, 2007
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(8. #07-3260 ROGER O'SHAUGHNESSY, 1265 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD, Continued)
Bremer commented the City has had to deal with fence issues for a number of years and that the language
should perhaps be reviewed.
Gaffron noted the City has made a number of changes to the fence ordinance over the years and that it is
conceivable the language was misinterpreted given the fact that this is a lot that abuts a major
thoroughfare and is also a lakeshore lot. Gaffron stated in his view a variance is the best way to handle
this situation at the present time.
McMillan stated perhaps the City should look at revising the language regarding the height of fences and
that three and a half feet might not be sufficient.
Breiner stated she personally would not have approved the variance application prior to the fence being
erected but that she would not require it to be removed.
Susan Steinwall stated Mr. O'Shaughnessy was before the City with a number of variance requests at the
time the property was developed and that it was not his intent to be in a position where he would have to
ask for an after-the-fact variance.
Bremer stated she would vote in favor of the after-the-fact variance because there is some ambiguity in
the City's fence code. .
VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
(Council recessed at 8:47 p.m. in order to convene the HRA meeting).
8:00 P.M. -HRA ANNUAL MEETING
(Council recessed at 8:47 p.m. in order to convene the HRA meeting).
(Co1.:111cil reconvened at 8:55 p.m.)
MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT
McMillan inquired whether any parties are going to be held for the employees who are retiring.
Moorse stated Steve Hansen was given a card and a gift certificate to a restaurant and that he would check
on arrangements for Mark Tomczyk. ·
McMillan stated she attended the LCMD Sa:ve the Lake dinner and that Gabriel Jabbour gave a great
speech on preserving our natural resources and Big Island. McMillan stated the event was well attended.
Murphy stated he visited Big Island last week with Gabriel Jabbour and that there is a considerable
amount of snowmobile traffic on the island, which would be difficult to stop. Murphy stated it was
suggested that some barrier protecting of the buildings be erected in the future during the wintertime.
Murphy commented they are attempting to get the steamship, the Minnehaha, to dock at Big Island and
that the biggest issue is what type of dock could be constructed to accommodate the steamship. Murphy
indicated the issue with a permanent dock is the shifting ice and that one option would be to install
casings that timbers could be dropped in each spring and then removed in the winter. Murphy stated a
PAGE 11 of 14
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
· 6:00 o'clock p.m.
8. . #07-3260 ROGER O'SHAUGHNESSY, 1265 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD, VARIAN CE,
8:23 P.M. -8:50 P.M.
Roger O'Shauglmessy, Applicant, was present.
Curtis stated the applicant.is requesting an after-the-fact variance to allow the existing five-foot high
wrought iron fence to remain where a i11aximum of 3.5 feet is allowed. The property is located on the
western side of Bracketts Point Road and has over 600 feet oflakeshore. In 2004, the property owner
received approvals from the City of Orono in order to redevelop the property. During a site inspection for _
a certificate of occupancy, the building inspector noted that a new fence had been constructed which
exceeded the City's height standards. The property owner would like the fence to remain as constructed
and he has applied for an after-the-fact variance.
The Plaiming Conm1ission should consider whether the hardship statement presented by the applicant
supports the granting of the variance. If the Conm1ission finds that there is a hardship or reasonable
justification to grant the variance, then a recommendation to approve would be appropriate. If the
Conunission determines that the fence as constructed is not reasonable and is inappropriate in the location
and height, then a denial reconm1endation would be in order . If the Planning Conunission feels the fence
is appropriate but not justified under the variance standards, a revision to the code is an option to
consider. If so, this application should be denied and sent to the City Council to detem1ine whether a
code change should be pursued .
O'Shauglmessy commented he does travel a lot and that he would like the fence for security.
O'Shauglmessy stated he has experienced people picnicking on his property, fishing from his shore and
parked in his driveway . O'Shaughnessy stated the fence helps to serve as a banier and that it was his
architect's understanding that he would be allowed a six-foot fence since this is a comer lot.
Chair Rahn opened the public hearing at 8:29 p.m.
There were no public conunents regarding this application.
Chair Ralm closed the public hearing at 8:29 p .m.
Sue Steinwall, Attorney-at-Law, stated cities have broad discretion in deciding whether a variance is
appropriate and that one of the standards the City needs to consider is whether the application is
reasonable and constitutes a reasonable use of the property. The fence is reasonable to provide the
applicant with the security that he needs and is unobtrusive.
Steinwall stated had they knovm the fence was going to be an issue, they would have addressed it at the
time this property was developed in 2004. Steinwall stated although one of Staff's recommendations is to
consider a denial of the variance and to send it on to the Council for possible code changes, they would
ask that the Planning Commission approve the variance application.
Kempf stated his feeling is that _this is a residential neighborhood and that this is the kind of place that the
ordinance was written to have lower fences between neighbors. Kempf conm1ented he does understand
PAGE 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#07-3260 Roger O'Shauglmessy, Continued)
the concern that the property is an attraction and draws people to the site, but that there are trees in the
area and a 42-inch fence would be a sufficient barrier. Kempf stated a wrought iron fence is probably less
intrusive but unfortunately does not meet the City's ordinance.
O'Shaughnessy stated the landscape architect p~rhaps interpreted the code inc01Tectly but that there is
some ambiguity in the code regarding comer lots and that it should read that it is only along county roads
that a higher fence is allowed. O'Shauglmessy stated it was a legitimate mistake and that denial of his
variance would require a substantial amount offence to be removed and replaced.
Ralu1 stated the fence seems reasonable and is not out of character with the neighboi"hood. Rahn stated
given the examples cited by the applicant for security, he would not be opposed to the fence. Rahn
conm1ented the City's fence ordinance in his opinion does need some tweaking but. that now is not the
time. Ralm suggested this item be placed on a future Planning Conunission work session.
Winer stated she agrees with the need for the fence from a security standpoint from the road as well as
fi:om the lake and that given the level of architectural detail of the house, it is easy to see how the property
owner could overlook this detail regarding the fence.
Kempf stated there are a number of incredible properties that draw people and that perhaps the City
should look at changing their ordinance to address security. Kempf stated the City has not chosen to
,vrite their ordinances to address a person's desire for security.
Rahn stated the City should afford a person's right to privacy to every resident.
Kempf stated in his opinion the City should look at changing the ordinance prior to approving this
application.
Rahn stated the perception of one's security should not be a city issue and should be a personal issue and
that the city's fence ordinance could be tweaked.
Curtis stated the Planning Commission could reconunend that the ordinance be changed in the fuhire as
part of this application.
Winer inquired whether the fence height with corner lots has come up in the past.
Gaffron stated the City's code reads as follows: "A fence not exceeding six feet in height may be located
along the street lot line of a lake frontage lot which abuts a major thoroughfare." Gaffron stated it is
possible the language could be interpreted that since the lot abuts a major thoroughfare, any street lot line
could have a s·ix-feet fence. Gaffron stated this is a unique lot and unique layout where you not only abut
a county road but also a minor neighborhood road. Gaffron stated this type of fence does :fit the character
of the neighborhood in his opinion and that this is a si~tmtion where the fence should remain.
PAGE 18
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#07-3260 Roger O'Shaughnessy, Continued)
Rahn stated the code does not say that the fence can only exceed 42 inches in height in the area where the
fence abuts the county road and that it could conceivably be inte1vreted that the fence could be at the
higher height the entire length.
Zullo stated the City's fence code should be revisited.
Rahn commented the City does deal with a number of fence issues and that there hopefully is a method to
make the code clearer.
Rahn moved, Kang seconded, to recommend approval of Application #07-3260, Roger
O 'Shaughnessy, 1265 Bracketts Point Road, granting of an after-the-fact variance to allow the
existing five-foot high wrought iron fence to remain, based on the finding that the fence is not out of
character with the neighborhood, the fence helps to address the security issues raised by the
applicant, the request is reasonableness, and further based upon the current ambiguous language in
the code regarding fences along county roads, with the recommendation that the Planning
Commission address the City's fence ordinance in the future. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 1, Kempf
.Opposed.
"'9. #07-3261 JAMES AND LINDA MARTINSON, 1330 CHERRY PLACE, VARIANCE
Rahn moved, Kempf seconded, to recommend approval of Application #07-3261, James and Linda
Martinson, 1330 Cherry Place, granting of a lot area variance. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0.
SKETCH PLAN
10. #07-3257 BPS PROPERTIES, 95 LEAF STREET, SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN, 8:51 -
9:29P.M.
George Stickney, BPS Properties, was present.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting a lot area variance to constrnct a replacement residence on a lot
that consists of O. 7 4 acre when one acre is required. The property is two lots in the Saga Hill revised
subdivision, which was platted in 1887. The cun-ent house on the property was constructed in 1935. The
proposed house is two stories with a basement walkout toward Grant Street and toward the lake at the
northeast corner of the house. The walkout toward the lake will be to a swale created in the location of
the existing house.
This is a sketch plan for a 39-a cre parcel proposed to be divided into 15 single-family residential lots, a
private road and a 5.44 total acre park outlet. The proposed 1.3 to two plus acre lot subdivision is in
PAGE 19
Date Application Received: 12-21-06
Date Application Complete: 12-21-06
60-Day Review Period Expiration: 02-21-07
Department Approval:
Name: Melanie Curtis
Title: City Planner
Item Description:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Administrator Approval:
Date: February 23, 2007
Item No.
Agenda Section:
#07-3260, Roger O'Shaughnessy, 1265 Bracketts Point Road-Variance -Resolution
Zoning District:
Lot Area:
List of Exhibits:
LR-lA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acre minimum
3.3 acres (144,491 s.f.)
Exhibit A -Resolution
Exhibit B -Draft Council Minutes of 02-12-07
Application Summary:
This application was before the Council at the February 12 th meeting. The applicant was requesting an
after-the-fact variance to allow the existing 5' high wrought iron fence to remain where a maximum of
3.5' is allowed. At the meeting on the lih the Council voted 5 -0 to approve the height variance for
the newly constructed fence.
Planning Commission Recommendation
On January 16, 2007, Planning Commission voted 6 -1 to recommend approval of the variance to
allow the fence to remain 5' in height.
Planning Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the attached Resolution, which reflects Council action of February lih
and approves the application as proposed by the applicants.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Adopt or amend the attached approval Resolution.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES
TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 78-1405 SUBDIVISION 7
FILE NO. 07-3260
WHEREAS, Roger D. O'Shaughnessy, a single person (hereinafter "the
applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1265 Bracketts Point Roadwithin the City of
Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows:
Attached as Exhibit A, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "property");
and
WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for an after-
the-fact variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1405 (7) to allow construction of
a fence 60" in height where 42" maximum height is permitted.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
Orono, Minnesota:
FINDINGS
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 07-3260.
2. The property is located in the LR -IA Lakeshore Residential Zoning District
which requires a minimum lot area of 2. 0 acres and a minimum lot width of 200'.
3. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on
January 16, 2007 and recommended approval of the fence height variance based
on the following findings:
a. The applicant's property is a comer lakeshore lot abutting County Road 15 as
well as Bracketts Point Road. The code language regarding fences along
roadways for comer lakeshore lots abutting a major thoroughfare and a local
street is ambiguous.
b. The wrought iron fence is not out of character with the neighborhood;
Page 1 of 4
c. The fence helps to address the security issues the applicant has identified;
d. The height variance request is reasonable considering all of the above
findings.
4. The City Council has considered this application including the following findings
and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff,
comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed
variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community:
a. The wrought iron fence is 60" as opposed to 72" which is the maximum
height fence allowed in any district. The applicant has not constructed the
highest fence possible.
b. The fence is dark in color with decreases its visibility within its surroundings.
c. The design of the fence is such that it has a very low level of opaqueness, thus
the visual impact of the fence is minimal. Further when mature, the
vegetation surrounding the fence should offer maximum screening.
5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to
it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting
the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire
hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a
convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable
hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the
applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code
and Comprehensive Plan of the City.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a
variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1405 Subdivision 7 to allow a 60"
wrought iron fence where a fence 42" maximum height is permitted, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants and annotated by
City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B. Any amendments to the site plan
Page 2 of 4
which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission
and City Council review.
2. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but
are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new
construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire
on that date (February 26, 2008).
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 have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this
resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants' heirs, successors and
assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the
property.
Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 26 th day of February, 2007.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk James M. White, Mayor
Property Owner( s)
Page 3 of 4
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of ___ _
2007 by James M. White, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and
said instrument was executed on behalf of the City.
ST A TE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
Notary Public
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of ___ _
2007 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and
said instrument was executed on behalf of the City.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
Notary Public
This instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of _____ , 2007 by
Roger D. O'Shaughnessy, a single person.
Notary Public
Page 4 of 4
LEGAL'DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : (from City of Orono records)
A tract of land comprised of part of Lot 10 and part of the
a c c r e t i on s o f Lo t s 9 a n d 1 0 a I I i n Re a r r a n g eme n t o f Or on o
Point, which land is particularly described as beginning at
a p o i n t o n t h e No r t h I i n e o f Go v e r nme n t L o t 3 , S e c t i o n 1 1 ,
Township 117, Range 23, distant 431.8 feet East of the West
Quarter corner of said Section 11; thence East along said
North I in e to i ts i n t er sect i on w i th the ext ens i on of the
we s t e r I y I i n e o f Lo t 3 i n Re a r r an g eme n t o f Or o n o Po i n t ;
thence southeasterly along the extension of the westerly
I ine of said Lot 3 to an intersect ion with a I ine drawn
para I I e I to and 20 feet wester I y, measured at. right ang I es.
f rem the wester I y Ii ne of Lot 1 in Rearrangement of Orono
Po'int; thence southwesterly along said parallel line and
its extension to an intersection with a I ine drawn para I lei
t o an 2 0 f e e t we s t e r I y , meas u r e d .a t r i g h t a n g I e s , f r om t h e
extension of the westerly I ine of Lot J, in Rearrangement
of Orono Point; thence southeasterly along said last described
parallel line to a point thereon 583.95 feet northwesterly
from the northwesterly corner of Lot 5 in Rearrangement of
Orono Point, as measured along said para I lei I ine and its
extension; thence southerly and southwesterly along a tangential
curve to the right with a radius of 221.17 feet, a distance of
169.38 feet; thence southwesterly along a I ine tangent to said
iast described curve a distance of 5 teet; tr,ence southwesterly
along a tangential curve to the right with a radius of 445.72
feet a distance of 119.25 feet; thence southwesterly along a
line tangent to said last described curve a distance of 107.3
f~et_,; thence westerly, deflecting to the right 44 degrees 42
minutes, a distance of 79.3 feet, more or less, to the shore of
Lake Minnetonka; thence northerly along said shore to its
intersection with a ·I ine drawn south, para I lei to the extension
of the West I ine of said Section 11 from the point of beginning;
thence north along said last described parallel line to the point
of beginning, according to the recorded plat thereof.
The bound a r i es o f wh i ch are marked by Jud i c i a I Lan dma r ks s e t
purusant to Torrns Case No. 13819, as shown by the plot of survey
on file in the Office of the-Registrar of Titles as Doc. No. 560982.
FENCE LOCA TIL. . SURVEY FOR
ROGER D. O'SHAUGP"TESSY
IN LOT 10, REARRANGEMENT OF Of POINT / /
____ HEN~-~!ffY, MINNES01" ___ __..,..,..-/_/, /
----~s~o~E __ ~o ____ .... SP· R_?__: N~7_8J5 .... _,.,,,,-/ 639.2---r--------n· ___ 7 .... ;:---:~9~:~--~-:--·--~-~---. / r----
-------
LAKE MINNETONKA
SMITH BAY
(from City of Orono records)
its extension to
~~t::iio~0 o:ef~e w:!t~riy Ji:~?~ofl l~~t R~~~~~~ !~:l the
of Orono Point; thence southeasterly along soid las? described
poroHel line to o poinl thereon 583.95 feel northwesterly
from the northwesterly corner of Lot 5 in Rearrangement of
Of"ono _Point, 011 measured QIQ said porc!lel line ond lls
re.corde plot ereof,
ore marked by Jud!c!al Loncmorks set
persuont to Torrens Cose No. lJ.819, as shown by the plot of survey
on file In lhe Office of the Registrar of Titles os Doc. No. 560982,
o: denoles iron morker
(908.:i) : denotes existing spot elevotion. meon seo level dolum
m:i'[ID: denotes proposed spot elevotion, meon sea level dolum
--910--: denotes e)(tsling conlou; fine, meon seo level dalum
~: denotes proposed contour line, meon sea level doturn
Bearings shown Cll'e based upon on assumed datum,
This survey shows the boundaries of the above described property,
and the proposed locotion or o propo=ied house thereon. It does not
purporl lo show any other improvements or encroachments.
• IOJltlllWlllffl..,._NIMftGIKl'Ulr.-ccn:.T°"'
----i<!Jllt•Tl<:IITl!tllllrl.CIT µ:.;;1:::t;;;;j~ej;;;:~;;;~;:;;;;:~;;:;;;;;;;;~::::1---; ---<:;a.,"'-"'""''-"""'"""""""""-,..
••. ✓
El<ISTMFENCE< ..•••••
\_ 0
PROJECT
,
I
I
l:i,..
/~ le /o
/~
I~ Jo ,~
I
I
·. I ii
I
LOT
'
0
;::o
r-1
)>
:;o
;::o
)>
z
2
C)
fTi \----------
--\
rr1
0
z
-{
0
. .,,
(,-!
~
~
~
~
\
Exhibit B
8. #07-3260 ROGER O'SHAUGHNESSY, 1265 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD -
VARIANCE
Susan Steinwall, Attorney-at-Law, appeared on behalf ofRoger.O'Shaughnessy.
Murphy inquired what impact this application would have on County Road 6.
Gaffron stated if Council approves the application, Staff would prepare fmdings that would set
forth that this property is a unique situation and that the fence is very opaque and of a light color.
Gaffron stated the City's fence ordinance can be interpreted differently and that perhaps the
language should be amended slightly in the future,
McMillan noted this is a lakeshore lot, which helps make it a unique situation.
Bremer inquired whether any of the fence is located within the 75 foot setback.
Gaffron stated the fence does not extend into the 75-foot setback.
Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to direct Staff to draft an approval resolution for
Application #07-3260, Roger O'Shaughnessy, 1265 Bracketts Point Road, based on the
findings .tbatthis is a lakeshore lot abutting a major thoroughfare, the fence is less than 25
percent opaque, is five feet tall rather than the allowed six feet, and has adequate
landscaping or screening3,round the fence.
Bremer commented the City has had to deal with fence issues for a number of years and that the
language should perhaps be reviewed.
Gaffron noted the City has made a number of changes to the fence ordinance over the years and
that it is conceivable the language was misinterpreted given the fact that this is a lot that abuts a
major thoroughfare and is also a lakeshore lot. Gaffron stated in his view a variance is the best
way to handle this situation at the present time.
McMillan stated perhaps the City should look at revising the language regarding the height of
fences and that three and a half feet might not be sufficient.
Bremer stated she personally would not have approved the variance application prior to the fence
being erected but that she would not require it to be removed.
Susan Steinwall stated Mr. O'Shaughnessy was before the City with a number of variance
requests at the time the property was developed and that it was not his intent to be in a position
where he would have to ask for an after-the-fact variance.
Bremer stated she would vote in favor of the after.:.the-fact variance because there is some
ambiguity in the City's fence code.
Date Application Received: 12-21-06
Date Application Complete: 12-21-06
60-Day Review Period Expiration: 02-21-07
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Date: February 7, 2007
Item No.??'
Department Approval: h r ,
Name: Melanie Curtis N' V
Title: City Planner
Item Description:
Administrator Approval: Agenda Section:
#07-3260, Roger O'Shaughnessy, 1265 Bracketts Point Road After-the-Fact Variance
Zoning District:
Lot Area:
LR-lA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acre minimum
3.3 acres (144,491 s.f.) I
AS/ftJS ,
r;i;;~ A 1~..:/.')~~6 (bl~
List of Exhibits: \}e · vt.fP;Jfl/)f ''J'f
Exhibit A-PC Action Notice dated 01-19-07 <,t;') ~p(2,c ' 5 ,.rb ~
Exhibit B -PC Memo & Exhibits of 0 1-10-07 . I f'r" tw~ ..r-{:, 11
Exhibit C -Draft PC Minutes of O 1-16-07 ti) W,,,ct6 ~~ . :::;_' z _{ A} ""t ..
, i:C(.~i..,,1, ~•-'"~
Application Summary: ' ~Z:O:W tf.; ~ ·
The property is located on the western side ofBracketts Point Road and has over 600' of lakeshore .. In
2004 the property owner received approvals from the City of Orono in order to redevelop the prope1iy.
During a site inspection for a Certificate of Occupancy the Building Inspector, Bruce Vang and
Planning Director, Mike Gaffron noted that a new fence had been constructed which exceeded the
City's height standards. The property owner would like the City to consider ~1g the fence remain as
constructed, and has applied for an after-the-fact variance in order to do so. (V /~ $C~1AJ,
l)lr:U---Ht/6 D 8U
The applicant is requesting an after-the-fact variance to allow the existing 5' high wrought iron fence
to remain where a maximum of 3.5' is allowed.
. ~·Pf.~ -~ --0
Planning Commission Recommendation
On January 16, 2007, Planning Commission voted 6 -1 to recommend approval of the variance to
allow the fence to remain 5' in height.
Planning Staff Recommendation
Staff finds that due to the uniqueness of the applicant's property, the unique character of the
neighborhood and the ambiguous language within the code the applicant's request for a height
variance for this type of fence is reasonable. Staff does not feel that there is an overwhelming need to
re-write the fence .standards as a whole; however if the Council finds the existing code language
ambiguous with regards to lakeshore corner lots abutting both a local street and a County roadway,
then perhaps an amendment to the fence regulations should be investigated.
Date Application Received: 12-21-06
Date Application Complete: 12-21-06
60-Day Review Period Expiration: 02-21-07
Department Approval: A I 1
Name: Melanie Curtis 'tv\ V
Title: City Planner '
Item Description:
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Administrator Approval:
Date: February 7, 2007
Item No.
Agenda Section:
#07-3260, Roger O'Shaughnessy, 1265 Bracketts Point Road After-the-Fact Variance
Zoning District:
Lot Area:
List of Exhibits:
LR-lA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acre minimum
3.3 acres (144,491 s.f.)
Exhibit A -PC Action Notice dated 01-19-07
Exhibit B -PC Memo & Exhibits of O 1-10-07
Exhibit C -Draft PC Minutes of 01-16-07
Application Summary:
The property is located on the western side ofBracketts Point Road and has over 600' oflakeshore. In
2004 the property owner received approvals from the City of Orono in order to redevelop the property.
During a site inspection for a Certificate of Occupancy the Building Inspector, Bruce Vang and
Planning Director, Mike Gaffron noted that a new fence had been constructed which exceeded the
City's height standards. The property owner would like the City to consider letting the fence remain as
constructed, and has applied for an after-the-fact variance in order to do so.
The applicant is requesting an after-the-fact variance to allow the existing 5' high wrought iron fence
to remain where a maximum of3.5' is allowed.
Planning Commission Recommendation
On January 16, 2007, Planning Commission voted 6 -1 to recommend approval of the variance to
allow the fence to remain 5' in height.
Planning Staff Recommendation
Staff finds that due to the uniqueness of the applicant's property, the unique character of the
neighborhood and the ambiguous language within the code the applicant's request for a height
variance for this type of fence is reasonable. Staff does not feel that there is an overwhelming need to
re-write the fence standards as a whole; however if the Council finds the existing code language
ambiguous with regards to lakeshore comer lots abutting both a local street and a County roadway,
then perhaps an amendment to the fence regulations should be investigated.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
The Council should approve the fence height variance and direct staff to d raft a resolution for
adoption at your next meeting; additionally Council may wish to direct staff to investigate an
amendment to the City's fence regulations for clarification.
CITY OF ORONO
2750 Kelley Parkway
PO Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
952.249.4600
TO: Roger D. O'Shaughnessy
1265 Bracketts Point Rd
Wayzata, MN 55391
ZONING FILE 07-3260
NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
DATE OF NOTICE: January 19, 2007
COPIES: Sue Steinwall via email
TYPE OF REQUEST: Variance
DATE OF MEETING: January 19, 2007
Planning Commission recommended as follows:
Approval of the after-the-fact variance to allow the existing fence at 5' in height.
VOTE: 6 FOR 1 AGAINST
Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as:
City Council-February 12, 2007 -Meeting starts at 7:00 pm
If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are
available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission.
If you have questions, please call City Planner, Melanie Curtis at 952.249.4627.
[:)(H71?1T (/
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
6:00 o'clock p.m.
8. #07-3260 ROGER O'SHAUGHNESSY, 1265 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD,
VARIANCE, 8:23 P.M. -8:50 P.M.
Roger O'Shaughnessy, Applicant, was present.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting an after-the-fact variance to allow the existing five-foot
high wrought iron fence to remain where a maximum of3.5 feet is allowed .. The property is
located on the western side of Bracketts Point Road and has over 600 feet oflakeshore. In 2004,
the property owner received approvals from the City of Orono in order to redevelop the property.
During a site inspection for a certificate of occupancy, the building inspector noted that a new
fence had been constructed which exceeded the City's height standards. The property owner
would like the fence to remain as constructed and he has applied for an after-the-fact variance.
The Planning Commission should consider whether the hardship statement presented by the
applicant supports the granting of the variance. If the Commission finds that there is a hardship
or reasonable justification to grant the variance, then a recommendation to approve would be
appropriate. If the Commission determines that the fence as constructed is not reasonable and is
inappropriate in the location and height, then a denial recommendation would be in order. If the
Planning Commission feels the fence is appropriate but not justified under the variance standards,
a revision to the code is an option to consider. If so, this application should be denied and sent to
the City Council to determine whether a code change should be pursued.
O'Shaughnessy commented he does travel a lot and that he would like the fence for security.
O'Shaughnessy stated he has experienced people picnicking on his property, fishing from his
shore and parked in his driveway. O'Shaughnessy stated the fence helps to serve as a barrier and
that it was his architect's understanding that he would be allowed a six-foot fence since this is a
comer lot.
Chair Rahn opened the public hearing at 8:29 p.m.
1
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
6:00 o'clock p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Chair Rahn closed the public hearing at 8:29 p.m.
Sue Steinwall, Attorney-at-Law, stated cities have broad discretion in deciding whether a
variance is appropriate and that one of the standards the City needs to consider is whether the
application is reasonable and constitutes a reasonableuse of the property. The fence is reasonable
to provide the applicant with the security that he needs and is unobtrusive.
Steinwall stated had they known the fence was going to be an issue, they would have addressed it
at the time this property was developed in 2004. Stein wall stated although one of Staff's
recommendations is to consider a denial of the variance and to send iton to the Council for
possible code changes, they would ask that the Planning Commission approve the variance
application.
Kempf stated his feeling is that this is a residential neighborhood and that this is the kind of place
that the ordinance was written to have lower fences between neighbors. Kempf commented he
does understand the concern that the property is an attraction and draws people to the site, but that
there are trees in .the area and a 42-inch fence would be a sufficient barrier. Kempf stated a
wroughtiron fence is probably the less intrusive but unfortunately does not meet the City's
ordinance.
O'Shaughnessy stated the landscape architect perhaps interpreted the code incorrectly but that
there is some ambiguity in the code regarding comer lots and that it should read that it is only
along countyroads that a higher fence is allowed. O'Shaughnessy stated it was a legitimate
mistake and that denial of his variance would require a substantial amount of fence to be removed
and replaced.
Rahn stated the fence seems reasonable and is not out of character with the neighborhood. Rahn
stated given the examples cited by the applicant for security, he would not be opposed to the
2
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
6:00 o'clock p.m.
fence. Rahn commented the City's fence ordinance in his opinion does need some tweaking but
that now is not the time. Rahn suggested this item be placed on a future Planning Commission
work session.
Winer stated she agrees with the need for the fence from a security standpoint from the road as
well as from the lake and that given the level of architectural detail of the house, it is easy to see
how the property owner could overlook this detail regarding the fence.
Kempf stated there are a number of incredible properties that draw people and that perhaps the
City should look at changing their ordinance to address security. Kempf stated the City has not
chosen to write their ordinances to address a person's desire for security.
Rahn stated the City should afford a person's right to privacy to every resident.
Kempf stated in his opinion the City should look at changing the ordinance prior to approving this
application.
Rahn stated the perception of one's security should not be a city issue and should be a personal
issue and that the city's fence ordinance could be tweaked.
Curtis stated the Planning Commission could recommend that the ordinance be changed in the
future as part of this application.
Winer inquired whether the fence height with comer lots has come up in the past.
Gaffron stated the City's code reads as follows: "A fence not exceeding six feet in height may be
located along the street lot line of a lake frontage lot which abuts a major thoroughfare." Gaffron
stated it is possible the language could be interpreted that since the lot abuts a major
thoroughfare, any street lot line could have a six-feet fence. Gaffron stated this is a unique lot
and unique layout where you not only abut a county road but also a minor neighborhood road.
Gaffron stated this type of fence does fit the character of the neighborhood in his opinion and that
this is a situation where the fence should remain.
3
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
6:00 o'clock p.m.
Rahn stated the code does not say that the fence can only exceed 42 inches in height in the area
where the fence abuts the county road and that it could conceivably be interpreted that the fence
could be at the higher height the entire length.
Zullo stated the City's fence code should be revisited.
Rahn commented the City does deal with a number offence issues and that there hopefully is a
method to make the code clearer.
Rahn moved, Kang seconded, to recommend approval of Application #07-3260, Roger
O'Shaughnessy, 1265 Bracketts Point Road, granting of an after-the-fact variance to allow
the existing five-foot high wrought iron fence to remain, based on the finding that the fence
is not out of character with the neighborhood, the fence helps to address the security issues
raised by the applicant, the request is reasonableness, and further based upon the current
ambiguous language in the code regarding fences along county roads, with the
recommendation that the Planning Commission. address the City's fence ordinance in the
future. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 1, Kempf Opposed.
4
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) ss.
)
CITY OF ORONO )
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
I, Denise M . Leskinen, of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify
that a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the matter of #07-3260, was mailed to the attached list of
property owners.
In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my han ay of January, 2007 .
Denise M . Leskinen
CITY OF ORONO
2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
Phone (952) 249-4600 Fax (952) 249-4616
NOTICE
The Planning Commission will hold public hearings in the Orono Council Chambers at 2780 Kelley
Parkway on Tuesday, January 16, 2007, beginning at 6:00 p.m. on the matter ofreviewing the following
land use applications:
#06-3225
#06-3232
#06-3242
#06-3247
#06-3249
#07-3250
#07-3251
David Carlson on behalfof 875 WBW, LLC., owner of 875 ·wayzata Boulevard West,
RR-lB zoning district, requests rezoning of the property to RPUD Residential Planned
Unit Development, and requests RPUD site plan and preliminaiy plat approval for a 9-
unit residential development on this 10.4-acre site.
Shmntt Design on behalf of Michael & Mmy Drazan, 3546 Ivy Place, LR-1 C zoning
distTict, requests a 0-75' zone hardcover variance to allow 7.1 % hardcover where 13.9%
cunently exists and 0% is 1101111ally allowed, and a 75' -250' zone hardcover variance to
allow 32.5% where 35% ctmently exists and 25% is nommlly allowed in conjunction
with the construction of a new single family home to replace the existing residence.
Rehn Hassell of Yunker Associates Architects on behalf of David & Betsy
Weyerhaeuser, 1540 Fox Street, RR-1 B zoning district, requests a conditional use permit
in order to allow plumbing within an accesso1y building.
Suisse Capital LP, 1470 Cherry Place, LR-lB zoning district, requests variances for lot
area and lot width for construction of a new residence on a lot of 0.67 acre in area where
1.0 acre is required and having a width of 85' where 140' is required; and a bluff setback
vanance.
City of Orono, proposes an amendment of the Orono Connmmity Management Plan
(Comprehensive Plan) with regards to the property at the northwest quadrant of the
Willow Drive/Highway 12 intersection, known as PIN #33-118-23-11-0060, legally
described as Outlot A, Stonebay, owned by Dahlstrom Development LLC, and cunently
zoned RR-lB One-Family Rural Residential dist1ict. The proposed amendment would re-
guide this commercially-guided prope1ty to allow for primarily office uses with only
minimal retail uses.
Philip Carlson ofinter-Space West, Inc., 2060 ·wayzata Boulevard West, B-6 PUD
zoning district, requests concept pla11 approval, preliminmy plat approval for the creation
of 10 lots and one conm1on lot, commercial site plan approval, as well as easement
vacations in order to develop the property as Amber Woods Office Centre, LLC.
Mandeep and Leisa Sodhi, 4080 Dahl Road, LR-lB zoning district, request a setback
variance to allow the existing deck to remain as constrncted with a 0.76 foot setback from
the side property line when a ten foot setback is required and to have 27 percent
hardcover in the 75 to 250 foot zone when the maximum is 25 percent.
#07-3252
#07-3253
#07-3254
#07-3256
#07-3259
#07-3260
#07-3261
James MacKinnon, :XX.,X.,"'{ Watertown Road, RR-lB zoning dis1.Tict, requests final
plat approval in order to develop a property consisting of 16.7 acres into six, two-acre
lots.
Jennifer Cogbill, 1590 Long Lake Blvd., LR-lA zoning district, requests a side setback
variance to allow a 21.6' setback from the side lot line where 30' is normally required
and 27 .2' cunently exists in order to constrnct a 6' x 24' addition to accommodate a legal
staircase to the basement.
Metro Building Co. on behalf of Guardia Development Group LLC., 940 North Arm
Drive, LR-lB zoning district, requests an average lakeshore setback variance in order to
remodel the existing home which will include moving the existing attached garage to the
south and constructing a three-season porch where the existing deck is located. The
home is located almost entirely ahead of the average lakeshore setback line.
Matthew and Kathy Dolliff, 2680 Pheasant Road, LR-lB zoning district, request
approval of a revision to the hardcover variance granted in zoning file #02-2754 so they
may construct a third garage stall while maintaining the same amount of hardcover,
34.19% in the 75 to 250 foot zone, when the maximum is 25 percent.
Lake Count1y Builders on behalf of Kathy and Gaiy Gangstee, 1374 Rest Point Road,
LR-lB zoning district, requests the following variances to allow modification of the
existing house and garage including removal of the wing of the house closest to the street,
a 40 square foot addition to the house, reconstruction and expansion of the second sto1y
of the house, the addition of dormers to the garage roof and construction of a two sto1y
link between the house and garage: To have a street setback of 18 feet when a 12 foot
setback cunently exists and a 30 foot setback is required. To maintain a side setback for
the existing garage of 9 feet 1 inch when a 10 foot setback is required. To have 28.32
percent hardcover in the 75 to 250 foot zone when 25 percent is allowed and 29.35
percent cmTently exists.
Roger D. O'Shaughnessy, 1265 Bracketts Point Road, LR-lA zoning dishict, requests
after-the-fact approval for a height variance to allow the existing fence to remain 5' tall
where a maximum of 42" is nom1ally allowed. ·
James and LindaMaiiinson, 1330 Cherry Place, LR-IB zoning district, request a lot area
vaiiance to construct a replacement residence on a lot that is 0.74 acre when 1 acre is
required.
All persons wishing to be heard are encouraged to attend this meeting. This is not a final agenda and is
subject to change prior to the hearing. Written comments are accepted and should be submitted to the
City of Orono by January 9, 2007 if possible. Plans or proposals are available for review in the City
Offices and all interested persons are encouraged to contact the City for fmiher infom1ation. For an
appointment, please call (952) 249-4600.
2
City of Orono
By: Planning Connnission
Melanie Curtis, City Planner
To be published in the Sun Sailor on January 4, 2007.
Posted at: Orono City Offices
Crystal Bay Post Office
Long Lake Post Office
Navarre Post Office
3
RUN DATE: 12/19/2006 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORi'\1A TION SYSTEM (PROPERTY OWNERS LIST)
38 11-117-23 23 0008
1491 SHORELINE DR
J C KRIER & R C KRIER
JANET C KRJER
1491 SHORELI NE DR
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 11-117-232300 16
1480 GREEN TREES RD
C &S PLATOU
CARL & SUSAN PLATOU
1480 GREEN TREES RD
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 11 -11 7-23 32 0016
38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
G M DANKO & N R DANKO
GEORGE M & NANCY R DANKO
151 0 GREEN TREES RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 11-117-23320019
1280 BRACKETTS POINT RD
RS JOHNSON & B K JOHNSON
ROBBIN SIB KRISTINE JOHNSON
1280 BRACKETTS POINT RD
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 11-117-23 23 0014
1520 GREEN TREES RD
DD RYERSEJR & ML RYERSE
DORANCE D RYERSE
15 20 GREENTREES RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 11-117-23320010
1265 BRACKETT$ POINT RD
ROGER D O'SHAUGHNESSEY
ROGER D O'SH AUGHNES SEY
1056 2 ESTATE DR
EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347
38 11-117-2332 0017
1300 BRACKETTS POINT RD
GEORGES PILLSBURY ET AL
GEORGES PILLSBURY
901 MARQUETTE AVE #2630
MPLS MN 55402
38 11-117-23 32 0020
1400 BRACKETTS POINT RD
JAMES R & MARY J JUNDT
JAMES R& MARY J JUNDT
1400 BRACKETTS PO INT RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
1 CERTIFY THA;r THE F A/,Ts REPRESENJE A _ ~lc~RA~ND TRUE ru::PF,E ENI~N OF INFORJv!A noN
AS IT APP_f,.,ARf/rq DJAT,~ 9~ TH E Rf~? -;g-'(.,C11?E P~fj)U~;J-T~ YER SERVf'\Es DEPARTMENT.
DATE: ! 1.---I • G,x., BY: '/' V I (t -, _/, 1/v',, /"l l
I I l// --(J ----·
38 11 -11 7-23 23 0015
1510 GREEN TREES RD
GM DANKO & N R DANKO
GEORGE M & NANCY R DANKO
1510 GREEN TREES RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 11-1 17-23320015
38 ADDRESS UNASS IG NED
DD RYERSE JR & ML RYERSE
DORANCE D RYERSE
1520 GREENTREES RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 11 -11 7-23 32 00 18
1220 BRACKETTS POINT RD
JULE M HANNAFORD IV ET AL
JULE M HANNAFORD IV &
ELIZABETH A HANNAFORD
1220 BRACKETTS POINT RD
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 11 -117-23 32 0021
1200 BRACKETTS POINT RD
NOBL E PROPERTIES OF MN LP
NOBLE PROPERTIES OF MN LP
15250 WAYZATA BLVD #10 5
WAYZATAMN 55391
PAGE: 1
Y~ ~ ,,.._ $.t{.c,f~~ ~~ NG;. ~ ~ l).N64ii6-e -
( ~ ~, ~ ~ /.J-AJJ ~Dt.,,iT)
t ~ µ
~+\-~ ~5r-J,-f~~~s~ ~-e-c,~ry ~c-,,,,uC:,
/ /J 0-LA./4...._ ~p{.., I ~/;. J....)~:,
FILE #07-3260
10 January 2007
Page 1 of 1
Subject: 07-3260, Roger O'Shaughnessy, 1265 Brackett's Point Road
✓ After-the-Fact Variance
✓ Public Hearing
Zoning District: LR-1A, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acre
minimum
Lot Area: 3.3 acres (144,491 s.f.)
The property is located on the western side of Brackett's Point Road and has
over 600' of lakeshore. In 2004, the property owner received approvals from the
City in order to redevelop the property with a new home. During a site inspection
for a Certificate of Occupancy Orono's Building Inspector, Bruce Vang and
Planning Director, Mike Gaffron noted that a new fence had been constructed
which exceeded the City's height standards. As the property owner would like
the City to consider letting the fence remain as constructed he has applied for an
after-the-fact variance in order to do so. The applicant is requesting an after-the-
fact variance to allow the existing 5' high wrought iron fence to remain where a
maximum of 3.5' is allowed
Planning Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider whether the
hardship statement presented by the applicant supports the granting of the
variance. If the Commission finds that there is a hardship or reasonable
justification to grant the variance then a recommendation to approve would be
appropriate ...
If the Commission determines that the fence as constructed is not reasonable,
and is inappropriate in the location and height then a denial recommendation
would be in order. ...
If the Planning Commission feels the fence is appropriate but not justified under
the variance standards perhaps a code revision is an option to consider. If so
this application should be denied and sent to Council to determine whether a
code change should be pursued. _ 617-.'1
Date Application Received: 04-21-04
Date Application Considered as Complete: 04-28-04
60-Day Review Period Expires: 06-28-04
To:
From:
Date:
Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members
Ron Moorse, City Administrator
Melanie Curtis, City Planner yiv
January 10, 2007
Subject: 07-3260, Roger O'Shaughnessy, 1265 Brackett's Point Road
✓ After-the-Fact Variance
✓ Public Hearing
FILE #07-3260
10 January 2007
Page 1 of 3
Zoning District:
Lot Area:
LR-lA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acre minimum
3.3 acres (144,491 s.f.)
Application Summary: The applicant is requesting an after-the-fact variance to allow
the existing 5' high wrought iron fence to remain where a maximum of 3.5' is allowed
Staff Recommendation: Planning Commission should consider the options listed within
the staff report.
Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections
✓ Sec. 78-1279.
✓ Sec. 78-1405.
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A -Application
Exhibit B-Hardship Documentation Form
Exhibit C -Existing Survey
Exhibit D -Proposed Plans and Elevations
Exhibit E -Photos submitted by the Applicant
Exhibit F-Resolution No. 5195
Exhibit G -Property Owners List
Exhibit H -Plat Map
Background
The property is located on the western side of Brackett's Point Road and has over 600' of
lakeshore. In 2004 the property owner received approvals from the City of Orono in
order to redevelop the property. During a site inspection for a Certificate of Occupancy
the Building Inspector, Bruce Vang and Planning Director, Mike Gaffron noted that a
new fence had been constructed which exceeded the City's height standards. As the
property owner would like the City to consider letting the fence remain as constructed he
has applied for an after-the-fact variance in order to do so.
Lot Area/Width:
LR-lA
Required
Actual
Zoning Code Requirements
Lot Area
2 acres (87,120 s.f.)
3.3 acres (144,491 s.f.)
Lot Width
200'
FILE #07-3260
10 January 2007
Page 2 of 3
650'+ (measured at a line
parallel to the shore)
City Code states that fences erected in all zoning districts are considered as a
nonencroachment when they conform to the standards within Zoning Code Section 78-
1405, for a lakeshore lot those standards are as follows:
✓ Fences within the required street (rear) yard or side street yard of a lakeshore lot shall
not exceed 42 inches above original grade. Exception: A fence not exceeding six feet
in height may be located along the street lot line of a lake frontage lot which abuts a
major thoroughfare. A major thoroughfare for purposes of this section means any
county road or state highway. The subject property has frontage along County Road
15 to the north.
✓ Fences within the required side yard of a lakeshore lot shall not exceed six feet in
height, and any portion located lakeward of the average lakeshore setback line shall
not exceed 42 inches in height. The term "average lakeshore setback line" means a
line drawn between the most lakeward projection of the fence owner's principal
residence structure and the most lakeward projection of the adjacent affected
principal residence structure. The subject property is unique in that it does not have a
defined break in the "side yard" on the south and the rear yard.
✓ Fences shall not be constructed within the defined lakeshore yard of a lakeshore lot,
i.e., shall not be located within 75 feet of the shoreline for general development lakes,
100 feet for recreational lakes, or 150 feet for natural environment lakes. The fence in
question does not extend into the 75' setback.
In 2005, the City Council amended the nonencroachment section of the Zoning
Ordinance to allow for a gate to exceed the 42" maximum height limitation when
constructed with entrance monuments. This code amendment gave lakeshore lots such as
this one the flexibility to meet the fence height requirements, have decorative, property
defining entrance monuments and have a decorative, functional gate for security
purposes. The code amendment allowed the gate height to be up to the height of the
entrance monuments, which are limited to eight feet in height. Additionally gates must
be less than 25% opaque. The code does not distinguish between fences of high or low
opaqueness.
Hardship Statement
Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and
should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application.
Hardship Analysis
FILE #07-3260
10 January 2007
Page 3 of 3
In considering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the
proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in
the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances
from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause
undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and
shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the
spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code.
Staff finds that the applicant's request may be reasonable in that there is not a definite
demarcation of the side vs. the rear lot line on the property's southern portion, and that
the fence maintains a consistent height over the entire property rather than having a
variety of heights.
Issues for Consideration
1. Does the Planning Commission find that the applicant's request is reasonable and
meets the intent of the fence regulations?
2. Does the Planning Commission find that there is a unique hardship specific to the
property to justify the fence height variance?
3. If the Planning Commission finds that the applicant's request is reasonable is it
more appropriate to consider a Zoning Code Amendment rather than a variance?
4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application?
Staff Recommendation
The Planning Commission should consider whether the hardship statement presented by
the applicant supports the granting of the variance. If the Commission finds that there is
a hardship or reasonable justification to grant the variance then a recommendation to
approve would be appropriate ...
If the Commission determines that the fence as constructed is not reasonable, and is
inappropriate in the location and height then a denial recommendation would be in
order ....
If the Planning Commission feels the fence is appropriate but not justified under the
variance standards perhaps a code revision is an option to consider. If so this application
should be denied and sent to Council to determine whether a code change should be
pursued.
City of Orono
Variance Application
Street Address : .
2750 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356
Main: 952-249-4600
tax: 952-249-4616
Mailing Address :
Application#. /J1-3;,xpO
Date Received: i ~ 2: I Ol.P
Amount Paid: /11f8 "
staff: M &l~-+--..-,r'-r-w,,....,....---
Fee: _$::?:.:6:.:::0~0 _______ _
Renewal: _;$:,;.:3:.:::00c.:;..--,---=__,.-,-...,,,,__-
After-the-fact: $1,200 Double Fee
P .. o. Box66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066
This application form must be completed in full .. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the
application Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas.
PROPERTY INFORMATION:
Site Address: 1265 Bracketts Point Road, Wayzata, MN 55391
Property ldentifi~tion Number (PIN): __,;;,,;ll;;_-..;;;1.,;;,.I7;._-..;;;2.,;;,.3-....,;3:;.;;2;._-.,;;,.00:..;;l:;.;;O ____________ _
(Attach legal description to application if not.included on the survey .. ).
Date Property Acquired (month/year): · 5/03 □ Yes, I own·the adjacent parcels .
Present use of property: rgJ Re·sidential □ Other ________________ _
Zoning District: _ _.L..,.R_-,...1 A...._ ____ _
APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal names and marital status required for each interested party)
Name: Roger D. O:':Shaughnessy, a sipgle man
Phone (home): __________ Phone (work): _9_52_-_9_3_5-_1_7_22 ______ _
Address: 1265 s,Bracketts Point Road, Wayzata, MN 5539]
Email: ct:racy@ca1:dinalcorp.com Fax: _9,..,5..,.2.,,;;-""9...,,3"5-_5"'5.._'3"'8.__ __ -,-:c,------
OWN~R INFORMATION: (Complete legal names and marital status required for each interested party)
Name: Roger D. O'Shaughnessy. a single man
Phone (home): · ::: .. •• .::< Phone (work): ...:!9~5-=-2-_.9:...:3~5-....,lw.7-=2=-2 ______ .;...
Address: · 1265 Bracketts Point Road, Wayzata, MN 55391
· Email: ctracy@cardinalcotp.com Fax: ... 9~5:..=2'--~9,,,.35,-....,5 ... 5!,..,3~8:,__ ______ _
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost: $ ___ _
Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary):
The Applicant seeks the City's approval..gf a five-foot fence that has been constructed at tbe
Applicant's new home at 1265 Brackett~ Point Road. The fence is illustrated in the photographs
that accompany this Application. The height of the fence is five feet ·across the entire prope1:·ty.
The fence does not encroach into the 75 ~foot shoreline setback area or the average lakeshore
setback line.
The Orono Code allows "a fence not exceeding six feet in height may be located a1ong the street ·1ot
line of a lake .frontage lot which abuts a major thoroughfare." Orono City Code at i 78-1405<7)(b).
Sim.ilarly, a City Fence Regulation sunnnary available on the City's web site states that a ·six-foot
!~nee is perm~ssible at "Corner Lots" along "County ·& MSA Funded Roads ."
The Applicant's property is . a corq.e1:· lot at Brac~etts Point Road and County Road. 15. At five
feet, the Applicant's fence is less than the maximum six-foot height allowable in the side yards
and the street yard abutting County Road 15. In this case, the Applicant seeks the City'S.
approval of a five-foot .fence along the remaining leg of the Applicant's corner lakeshore lot, that
is, the leg of ·the fence abutting Bracketts Point Road.
S5,
(7
:. ~--
p/J
' _.-;c--:--::--,) {y
. ___ ..,.
1
REQUIRED SUBMITTAL$:
All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your
application to be processed ..
□ Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner.
□ Completed Application Form
□ Completed Hardship Documentation Form
□ Certified Property Owners List -owners within 150' of the subject property, labels and plat map ..
List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance,
Government Center, A-603 300 South 6th Street, Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910
□ Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the requirements
listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations .. Also provide one copy 8 .. 5" x 11 u or
11" x 17" for reproduction ..
□ Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet).
□ Topographic survey -including existing and proposed elevations, and proposed grading and
drainage .. *For lakeshore properties the contours should be shown extending 50' into the
adjacent properties .. Provide one copy 8 .. 5" x 11" or 11" x 17" for reproduction ..
□ Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8 .. 5" x 11" or 11" x 17")
□ Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. *
APPLICANT'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning
Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or
consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is
true and correct to the best of his/her knowled e . The plican cognizes that he/she is solely
responsible for submitting a complete ing a that upon failure to do so, the
staff has no alternative but to reject "-+'-ilrm omp r to recommend the request for
denial of the requ ess of its erit. Mlllll'IMI~ , ~1-.--. J _J
Applicant's Signature: _ .,_.,_ /-.,,
Applicant's Signature:
and further authorizes reasonable
mmission & Council Members for
Owner's Signature: ate: / -z./-u, /4,J:,
Owner's Signature: ---------~;.._ ___ ~:.,_
Date: .t
Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 ays before the Planning Commission
Meeting .. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month .
Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and
Council . If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to
have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner
assigned to your project.
DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY
In accordance with MS 13 04, Subd .2, "Rights of subjects of data", we would like to inform you
that your request for a permit or license from the City of Orono or any of its departments may
require you to furnish certain private or confidential information ..
You are notified that:
1 The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or
license requested .
2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or
license .
3.. The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent
necessary to process the permit or license .
4.. If your requested permit or license requires Council action to approve, some information
may become public ..
5. You have certain rights under M.S. 13 .. 04 (see following page) to review private data on
yourself .
6. Your full name is required to process this application or permit.
Roger D.
First Middle
1265 Bx ·acketts Point Road
Address
Wa zata
City
O'Shaughnessy
Last
55391
Zip
~le."";:--, i(-~?.~
<) ·. ·~ ¼.)"i ---..
952-935-1722
Phone
'{J)':, ._· ,., . ,.
~
Page 1 of3
HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM
This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application
will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is
complete and submitted to the City
Minnesota State Statutes Section 394.27, Subdivision 7 requires that a hardship be
demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted.. The hardship must be unique to the
property as variances run with the land and not the land owner.. Personal and economic
situations are not considered valid hardships In order for an application to be heard by
the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be
demonstrated
HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP?
This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship
exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community.. To prove a hardship,
address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible.
Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the
variance is Justified. The information the City receives is what is used in determining a
denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will not be considered ..
Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request (some may
not apply):
1 . "The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under
conditions allowed by the official controls."
See attached.
2. "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not
created by the landowner .. "
The propex·ty is a corner lot and has an unusual configuration.
3, "The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality .. n
The requested variance will~·not alter the character of the
locality. Care has been given to presexve neighbot:·s' lake views
and to present a first class appearance. See attached photographs.
4.. "Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if
reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter .. "
See attached.
5.,
6 ..
7,
8,
9.,
10 ..
11 ..
Page2of3
"Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered
construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J .. 06, Subd .. 2, when in
harmony with this Chapter .. "
Not applicable.
"The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a
variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone
where the affected person's land is located "
The use and requested variance are conforming.
"The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a
one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling .. •
Not applicable.
''The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar
to such property or immediately adjoining property .. 0
See attached.
"The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in
which said land is located .. "
See attached.
"The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment
of a substantial property right of the applicant."
The va1:·iance will provide the applicant with safety, security.
and privacy.
"The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety,
comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning
Code."
The va1:·iance will not in any way impair health, safety. comfor~,
or morals and will not be contrary to tbe intent of the Zoning Code.
The fence is consistent with the Codes opacity ·requirements. It
does not block traffic sight lines, and is consistent with the high
quality construction of neighboring properties.
Page 3 of3
12.. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the
applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty .. w
see attached.
Hardship Statement
Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be described in the above criteria, describe the
unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance
with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if
necessary}:
See attached.
HARDSHIP STATEMENT
1265 Bl'aeketts Point Road
December 20, 2006
The Applicant has constructed a five-foot wrought iron fence along three sides of his Lake
Minnetonka propexty at the comer of Bracketts Point Road and County Road 15 The pwpose
of the fence is to provide the Applicant with secwity for his p1ope1ty, pxivacy, and safety. The
fence is illustrated in the photographs that accompany this Application.. The height of the fence
is five feet on all three sides .. The fence does not encroach into the 75-foot shoreline setback area
or the average lakeshore setback line ..
The Orono City Code states that at lakeshoze lots, fences shall not exceed 42-inches, but allows
fo1 ce1tain exceptions. The Code allows "a fence not exceeding six feet in height may be located
along the street lot line of a lake frontage lot which abuts a ma.jot tho1oughfare." Orono City
Code at § 78-1405(7)(b){l). In addition, the Code permits fences not exceeding six feet in
height within the required side yards of a lakeshore lot. See O10no City Code at § 78-
1405(7)(b )(2) .. A summary of City fence 1egulations available on the City's web site states that a
six-foot fence is permissible at lakeshore "Comet Lots" along "County & MSA Funded Roads"
The Code together with the summary suggest that a six-foot fence is permissible along all streets
and side yards of corner lakeshore lots that abut county toads or state highways, such as is the
case with the Applicant's propexty .. Based on that inte1p1etation, the Applicant constructed his
new fence at five-feet. Once it had been consttucted, the City tequested that the Applicant apply
fo1 this "after constmcted" vaxiance relating only to the stretch of fence that parallels Bracketts
Point Road.
The Applicant's prope1ty is a comer lot at Bracketts Point Road and County Road 15 and is
situated in such a way that makes it difficult to constmct a unifotm and attractive fence while
meeting a strict inte1p1etation of the City's fencing xegulations. At five feet, the Applicant's
fence is less than the maximum six-foot height allowable in side yards and street yaxds for
lakeshore lots that abut a county toad. In this case, the Applicant seeks the Cicy's approval of a
five-foot fence section along the remaining leg of the Applicant's comer lakeshore lot, that is,
that portion of the fence that parallels Bracketts Point Road.
The fence is an open wrought ixon design and meets the City's opacity level of25% fo1 gates, as
set forth at the Section 78-1405(8)(i).. Lake views from neighboring properties and motoxists
have been pxesexved The fence is consistent with the first class caliber of the neighborhood and
does not.present a ttaffic or safety hazard.
2956541_3 DOC
T
i FENCE LOCATION SURVEY FOR //
ROGER D. O'SHAUGHNESSY /
IN LOT 10, REARRANGEMENT OF ORONO POINT / /
____ HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA --~ /
----~89°03'41" E __ 431.80 ____ ··---~o. RD. N<~t_88 15 ··-----/~// //
639
·
2
---,-~_-----:~9°03'~1" E--~3455~-r\--_/'/,,----
~Of • { ·--._ \ __.........
--~----------------------
0 q
0
a.!
"-" ~
::E
0
0
0)
<p
~
0)
"' "'
{
I\\
\
~
\
\
""
"' ~
"" \
929.4 CONT~ LH:· ..
LAKE MINNETONKA
SMITH BAY
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES (from City of Orono records)
A troct of land comprised of part of Lot 10 and port of the
accretions of Lots 9 and 10 all in Rearrangement of Orono
Point, which land is particularly described as beginning at
a point on the North line of Government Lot 3, Section 11,
Township 117, Range 23, distant 431.8 feet East of the West
Quarter corner of said Section 11; thence East along said
North line to its intersection with the extension of the
westerly line of Lot 3 in Rearrangement of Orono Point;
thence southeasterly along the extension of the westerly
line of said Lot 3 to an intersection with a line drawn
from the westerly line of Lot 1 in Rearrangement of Orono
Point; thence southwesterly along said parallel line and
its extension to an intersection with a line drawn parallel
to and 20 feet westerly, measured at right angles, from the
extension of the westerly line of Lot 3, in Rearrangement
of Orono Point; thence southeasterly olong said last described
parallel line ta a point thereon 583.95 feet northwesterly
from the northwesterly corner of Lot 5 in Rearrangement of
Orono Point, as measured along said parallel line and its
extension; thence southerly and southwesterly along a tangential
curve to the right with a radius of 221.17 feet, a distance of
169.38 feet; thence southwesterly along a line tangent to said
last described curve a distance of 5 feet; thence southwesterly
along a tangential curve to the right with a radius of 445.72
feet a distance of 119.25 feet; thence southwesterly along a
line tangent to said lost described curve a distance of 107.3
feet; thence westerly, deflecting to the right 44 degrees 42
minutes, a distance of 79.3 feet. more or less, to the shore of
Lake Minnetonka; thence northerly along said shore to its
intersection with a line drawn south, paral1el to the extension
of the West line of said Section 11 from the point of beginning;
thence north along said last described parallel line to the point
of beginning, according to the recorded plot thereof.
The boundaries of which are marked by Judicial Landmarks set
persuant to Torrens Cose No. 13819, as shown by the plot of survey
on file in the Office of the Registrar of Titles as Doc. No. 560982.
o denotes iron marker
(908.3) : denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum
!910.81 : denotes proposed spot elevation. mean sea level datum
--910--: denotes existing contour line. mean sea level datum
~: denotes proposed contour line, mean sea level datum
Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum.
This survey shows the boundaries of the above described property,
and the proposed location of a proposed house thereon. It does not
purport to show any other improvements or encroachments.
AOOmOtlAL lOPOGRAPHY o!< TREES AT NQRltt [t-0 OF LOT
WALLS REVISED, WALKW ... Y, &: [)00( A00£0 PER ARCHIT[CT
PROPOSED CONTOURS SHOWN ARE SHORE FROM ARCHIT[CT
12-1-06 PRJ EXISTINGf£NCEA00El'>
DESIGNED
DRAWN
ECO
CHECKED
MSG
I
I
I
I
l
I
. \ 7 0 \.e.::.-
8 \
I
I
I
I-.,
11....__,,
)
EXISTNG FENCE<.
\_
PROJECT
.,.___
":>ci"° ,_,,...
~/\
()
0
........................
........................
--r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(__J
---l
--> I
fl
I
LOT 2
I
0
---l
(.J-.!
-n
'-'
)
__ ............ 1
........................
........................
/-7 S)
' --;
GRONBERG AND
ASSOCIATES, INC.
Clvl Englms1I. Land Sl.neyon,, Land Planners
445 N. Wilow Drive, Long LGke, MN 55356
952-473-4141
\
I
"" ~
~
0
I
AJ
r:J
)>
::0
AJ
)>
-7 ,,_
0
fTi -
~
iTJ
·7
_j
0
·77
·-s;-~-·-·-·-·-\ ·-·-·-·-·-
===-=--, ------=·-=
\, ·, ·,.
' ·, ·,.
---------------------------
~\
'
' ' ' " \\·. t \ \-·\ i
""-\f
"'' .... \
'
' ' ''
\
' ' \ ---~ ~-
. i
I
/
! '
LAKE MINNETONKA.
@
1116"=1'-0" SITE PLAN 0PARTIAL ED
-----------------------
GENERAL NOTES,
\. SEE lANDS CAPE DRAWINGS FOR lA
2. DIMENSIONS G NDSCAPE INFO
FOR DIMENSIONS !VEN HERE FOR GEN • , £RAl INFORMATION ONLY S ' EE PLANS
32' 48'
---
O'SHAUGHNESSY
Residence
Lake Minnetonka
Minnesola
-
PARTIAL
SITE
PLAN
by
A1.01
\
\
\
\
\
\ I \ I
\ I
""--__/ -------=-=----------------
------------------= -----------------
JURISDICTION: CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING & ZONING
2750 KEllEY PAAWJIAY
CRYSTAL BAY, MN
(952) 249-4600
ZONE: lR-1A -ONE FAMILY lAKESHORE OIS1R!CT
------------HARDCOVER CftlCULAT!ON:
STRUCTURE BUILDING 8704 SQ.F-T, Ill
STORAGE SHED 675 Ill
SITE POOL 1093 ~
HOT TUB 417 □
---------PROPERlY LINE
-----·-·-·-·-·-SETBACK
----------EXISTING GfQ\OE
·------PROPOSEt GRADE
STONE WAl.l5 2108 □
DECK/STEPS 3279
DRIVEWAY 6911 ~
TOTAL = 23, 188 SO.FT. HIGH WATER ELEVAT!ON=931.5'
--------µ}---mm-tr------------------,2--~----------~ :--~ l ·----£=1~ -------------~---111_1 ~-mm--_J f-i:m ___ e __ ls_
HBGHT: 2 ¼ STORIES OR JO' IN HEIGHT, MEASUREO FROM THE HIGHEST ADJOINING GROUND LEVEL AT THE BUILDING OR 10' ABOVE THE LOWEST, WHICHE.VER IS LOWER. (EXISTNG GRAGE) H8GHT ~ TO THE HIGHEST POINT OF ANr ROOF EXCEF i GABLE OR HIP ROOFS ARE TAKEN AT THE MIOPOINT.
MINIMUM LOT AREA: 2 ACRES (THIS PARCEL IS 3 ½ -J ? ACRES DEPENO!NG ON THE EASEMENTS)
MINIMUM LOT WIDTH: 2DO' ( 600' + /-)
lAKESHORE SETBACK: 75' FROM ORDINARY HIGH WATER MAAK, ( +929') (AVERAGE lAKESHORE SETBACKS MAY APPLY)
FRONT YAAD SETBACK: 50' Ml:\SUREO FROM THE R.O.W.
SIDE YARO SETBACl<S: JO'
REM YAAD SETBACK: 50' (SIJPERCEOEO BY lAl<ESHORE SETBACK)
--------------7--H
I / If
;/ 11'
/( '
// i 1' /:
/ ! I ,· I I I
/ i l/
1
") / ~Th ~ I
=~~,.~~'I -~~ ~ ! ! i ~ .·~ !~ r:
7' . · ,. !f!l 11 " itt:f\'.l:-.✓:.:-/! : :
v>Joc~ i~ I/ :{....-·-· j EE I I
rsi i i
I I I
i .---·-/ ,·
, t<( SW.0 S£iBSCK _.-------·-•-·r 1
50 -~o __ .-·-·-· J 1' /: ---·-
-~~✓~JJ,, . ~-",, {.;/~::-~/2:~
.
·1(~£~ ~~.tr~~;'-,;;l,~1··
--..,-,,,_i,;_~~, \ I
---1'' ---------~.
------J '
---------J \ --~-::.:-I
-I
---------! \ ---------_j \
ABANDONED ROAD ----------------
\
'
g
g
g
\
'
0 ~~~PERTY PLAN DIAGRAM CD
\ ;(
0 10· 20· 30' ''-. 60' ,@ '\ :.--~-..:.-;;.,.r.~-..;.---
__________________ ~r--HEIGHT
9
~~p
----------------------~~ 934.ar
0 ~-~-IGHT LIMIT DIAGRAM CD
60' 90'
HARO COVER: IN THE 75' LAKESHORE SETBACK, NO COVERAGE IS ALLOWED. THJS INCLUDES ANY IMPERMEABLE MATERIALS INCLUDING BUILDINGS, POOL, GRAVEL, LANDSCAPING FABRIC AND PAVERS. FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE LOT, THE TOTAL HARDCOVER CANNOT EXCEED 25%. THIS NUMBER WOULD CALCUlATE TO BE 23,855 SF. FOR ALL SURFACES.
FLOODPlAlN REGULATIONS: lHE REGUlATORY FLOOD PROTECTION ELEVATION FOR I.AKE MINNETONKA SHALL BE 932.5 MSL •
LAND ALTERATIONS: ANr GRADING, EXCAVATION OR FILLING IS VERY RESTRICTEO, PAATCUlARLY IN THE lAKESHORE SETBACK (75')
GUESf HOUSE: A SEPARAiE DWELUNG ON AN EXISTING UNDIVIDED LOT FOR THE SOL£ USE OF THE OCCUPANTS OF THE PRINCIPAL BU!LD!NGS, INCLUDING THEIR DOMESTIC EMPLOYEES OR NON-PA"YING GUESTS. All. REGULAR LOT REQUIREMENTS SHAl.1 BE MET BY THE GUEST HOUSE.
THIS WOULD REQUIRE A 4 ACRE LOT IN ORDER FOR THE STRUCTURE TO BE OITACHEO.
A NON-RENTAL GUEST APAATMENT WOULD NECESSITATE AN ACCESS DOOR FROM WITHIN THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTIJRE.
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: ANY ACCESSORY BUILOING IS LIMITED TD 1,000 SF. ONE OVERSIZEO ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS AllOWED BASED ON THE SIZE OF LOT. FOR THIS LOT -J.51 -4.00 ACRE 1.6DO SF. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES C!,N BE NO CLOSER m THE FRONT LOT LINE THAN THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE, NOR CAN IT BE HIGHER.
DETACHED GARAGE: MAY BE AtlOWED IN THE REQUJRED SETBACK AT THE STREET, IF THE DOORS FACE AWAY FROM THE STREET AND THERE IS A TURNAROUND PROVIDED ON-SITE. IN THAT CASE IT COULD BE 10' FROM THE LOT LINE.
OVERHANGS: ALLOWED 1NTO STREErSlOE SETBACK UP TO 1 ½'
BOAT STORAGE: ON RESIDENTIAL LOTS
BOATS AND lRAILERS EXCEEDING JO FEET MUST BE STOREO IN A FU\lY ENCLOSED BUILOING MEETING All ~0 PUCABlE ZONING STANDARDS, INCLUDING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. 0 VICINITY MAP
159 South Jaclcaon
Sixth Floor
Seattle~ WA 98104
YOX 206 62.( 5670
fax 206 62,4 3730
O'SHAUGHNESSY
Residence
Lake Minnetonka
Minnesota
prindpolonl,,.._J_o __ _ ___ B_B __ _
.._by JM AM
""'1,,dby ___ _
jabno,. 03014.0 .... ----
by
ZONING
INFORMATION
A0.02
0 ~~~~~EAST ELEVATION
0 ~~~~~WEST ELEVATION
t-------r--'-1-rnmm_-
O 2' 4' 6' B'
&ga•a•rn
0 ;;~;,~~L NORTHWEST ELEVATION
16' 24'
MCT1\L CAPS---
I
0 if ~~i,~L i~lJ;~EST _ELE
ARCHITECTS
159 South Jackson
Sixth Floor
Seattle, WA 9810-'
vox 206 62.t 5670
Fox 206 62..t 3730
O'SHAUGHNESSY
Residence
Lake Minnetonka
Minnesota
d.odoodby __ _
Job no. 03014.0
dot. ---
-by
I
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. ___ i_li_fi_• '-~--
A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTIONS 78-1114 SUBDIVISION 2, 78-1117
AND 78-1366 AND VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING
CODE SECTIONS 78-282, 78-1112, AND 78-1288, AND DENYING
AV ARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING
CODE SECTION 78-1279 SUBDIVISION B
FILE NO. 04-3012
'WHEREAS, Roger D. O'Shauglmessey, a single person (hereinafter "the
applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1265 Brackett' s Point Road within the City
of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows:
Attached as Exhibit A (hereinafter the "property"); and
WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a
conditional use pem1it per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1114 Subdivision 2 and a
variance per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1112 to allow grading and filling
within the flood fringe; and
,vHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a
conditional use pennit per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1366 to allow chimney
heights in excess of 30'; and
\VHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a
variance per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-282 and 78-1288 to allow hardcover
within the 0-75' setback from the OHWL; and
\VHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a
variance per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 Subdivision B to allow a fence
within the lake yard; and
NO\V, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono,
Mi1mesota:
Page 1 of 6
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
~ 'll "'i .fii;;'. NO. ~--1. tr ('ii
FINDINGS
l. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #04-3012.
2. The prope1iy is located in the LR-1 A, Single Family Lakeshore Residential
District, which requires a minimum lot area of 2 acres and minimum lot width
of 200'. The area of the property is 3.3 acres (144,491 s.f.) and defined lot
width is 650'+.
3. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on
May 17, 2004 and recommended approval of a hardcover variance within the 0-
75' setback zone of 438 s.f. for a boardwalk and landing, a conditional use
permit for chimney heights in excess of 30'; and a conditional use pennit and
variance for grading; fill and a retaining wall located within the flood fringe
based on the following findings:
a. The applicant will conduct grading and filling below 931.5 MSL within the
flood fringe, consisting of constmction of a retaining wall, excavation and
mitigation as depicted on Exhibit B approved by the City Engineer.
b. The applicant will comply with the recommendations of the City Engineer
and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Rule C pe1mit # 04-210
regarding floodplain filling and mitigation.
c. The applicant will comply with Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1117,
standards for floodway and flood fringe conditional uses.
d. The applicant has proposed an environmentally friendly native floodplain
shoreline area as opposed to the existing maintained lawn extending to the
lake.
e. The chimneys at a height of 40' 8" will have no negative visual impacts
within the neighborhood and as an architectural feature will not be out of
character within the neighborhood.
4. The Planning Commission reviewed the application at a public hearing held on
May 17, 2004 and recommended denial of the fence request within 75' of the
OHWL based on the following findings:
Page 2 of6
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
r-~11 t11 Is. NO. :); ..1.. '.t'll QJ•
a. The applicant's request for a lake setback variance for a fence within 75' of
the OHWL should be denied as there is no hardship to support the variance.
5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and
recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments
by the applicant and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the
health, safety and welfare of the community.
6. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar
to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that
granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor
pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring prope1iy; would not merely
serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a
demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial
property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and
intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby
denies variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 Subdivision B, for a fence,
and hereby grants a variance per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-282 and 78-1288
for a wooden boardwalk and deck within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Mi1metonka, and a
variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-1112, to allow grading and filling
below 931.5' MSL, and a conditional use pennit per 78-1114 Subdivision+ for grading and
filling below 931.5' MSL and a conditional use pennit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-
1366 for the construction of chimneys up to 40'8" in height, subject to the follO\ving
conditions:
1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant and am10tated by
City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibits B and C. A . .ny amendments to the site
plan which are not in conformity \Vith City codes will require further Plarming
Commission and City Council review.
2. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone shall not increase above 438 s.f. or 0.09%. Hardcover in
the 75-250' zone shall be limited to 23,855 s.f. or 25% per the proposed plan and
hardcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit B. Applicant is advised that any
future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of existing/approved
hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be
approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover.
Page 3 of 6
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF T~EflTY.~COUNCIL
NO. . J \9 ~1
3. The applicant shall conduct grading and filling below 931.5 MSL within the flood
fringe, consisting of construction of a retaining wall, excavation and mitigation as
depicted on Exhibit B approved by the City Engineer.
4. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the City Engineer and the
Miimehaha Creek Watershed District Rule C pem1it # 04-210 regarding floodplain
filling and mitigation.
5. The applicant shall comply with Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1117, standards
for floodway and flood fringe conditional uses.
6. The applicant shall complete the floodplain restoration project and install all native
floodplain vegetation prior to construction of the boardwalk.
7. If at any time the native floodplain vegetation becomes a mowed lawn the applicant
must remove the board"valk in its entirety.
8. The boardwalk is limited to a 4' in width and 30" or less in height and a 177 s.f.
landing. No railing is allowed.
9. The chimney heights shall not exceed 40' 8" in height.
10. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but
are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building pennit for the new
construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire
on that date (June 14, 2005).
11. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the tem1s and conditions of this resolution
shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically tem1inate 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 the applicant and the applicant's heirs, successors and
assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the
prope11y.
Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 14th day of June, 2004.
Page 4 of 6
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk
Rofre.A O~JJA!lvt.f~
Property Owner(s)
ST A TE OF Mil-.TNESOT A
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE. CIT..Y ~OUNCIL
NO. 51 if~
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14 th day of June,
2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal
corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City.
••''.""?~·--.~.,., -~---~~~~~-~<•· !!:$!~:,
RACHEL DODGE (·
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HE:t'-ir,IEPIN
I
'·-!/ 0:. ('
Notary Public
.f
The foregoing instrument was ack:novdedged before me on this ,;::,_-.;('··day of
--·{!·, r-J. , 2004 by Linda S. Yee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a rvfinnesota
fuunicipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City.
'··;i··.t·:c·-'.·::
~-!C'T,1~,!';':· F~_f;,,<,..J,::, .. ;-?:·: .. ,,,.: ·• ···•
f•,-~/ Cc.~-1ri::2.s:v;·, Explres ~Llir, ~·-1,' :;.;~~:\,,_
~.,./ / ·-~-,. /"'
Notary Public
Page5of6
.'i
'·~ I
STATE OF MfNNESOTA
COU1'-'lTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 5 ll. 9 I
This instrnment wa~. acknowledged before me this l~ay of ( 1, P 1 1 _ , 2004
by Roger D. O'Shaughnessy, a single person. ~
....... ~~,:a............rr...~~
,9!iJS'~};;,, JODY A. WERNER
y.iii) Notary Public .l.p Minnesota
ff' My Commission Exr1res Jonuary 31, 2005 A,_,;;;,~......;..-~~
Page 6 of 6
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : (from City of Orono records)
A tract of land c077prised of part of Lot 10 and part of the
a c c r e t i on s o f Lo t s 9 a n d 1 0 a I I i n Re a r r a n g eme n t o f Or on o
Point, which land is particularly described as beginning at
a p o i n t o n t h e N o r t h I i n e o f Go v e r nme n t L o t 3 , S e c t i o n 1 1 ,
Township 117, Range 23, distant 431.8 feet East of the West
Quarter corner of said Section 11; thence East along said
North line to its intersection with the extension of the
we s t e r I y I i n e o f Lo t 3 i n Re a r r a n g eme n t o f Or o n o Po i n t ;
thence southeasterly along the extension of the westerly
I ine of said Lot 3 to an intersection with a I ine drown
parallel to and 20 feet westerly, measured at right angles,
f r om t h e we s t e r I y I i n e o f Lo t 1 i n Re a r r an g eme n t o f O r on o
Po'int; thence southwesterly along said para! lei I ine and
its extension to an intersection with a line drawn para! le!
to on 20 feet westerly, measured at right angles, from the
extension of the westerly I ine of Lot 3, in Rearrangement
of Orono Point; thence southeasterly along said last described
para\ lei I ine to a point thereon 583.95 feet northwesterly
from the northwesterly corner of Lot 5 in Rearrangement of
0 r on o Po i n t , a s me a s u r e d a I o n g s a i d p a r a I I e I \ i n e an d i t s
extension; thence southerly and southwesterly along a tangential
curve to the right with a radius of 221.17 feet, a distance of
169.38 feet; thence southwesterly along a I ine tangent to said
iast described curve a distance of 5 teet; thence southwesterly
along a tangential curve to the right with a radius of 4~5.72
feet a distance of 119.25 feet; thence southwesterly along a
line tangent to said last described curve a distance of 107.3
feet; thence westerly, deflecting to the right 44 degrees 42
minutes, a distance of 79.3 feet, more or less, to the shore of
Lake Minnetonka; thence northerly along said shore to its
intersection with a·line drown south, para! lei to the extension
of the West line of said Section 11 from the point of beginning;
thence north along said last described parallel line to the point
of beginning, according to the recorded plot thereof.
The bounder ies of which are marked by Judicial Landmarks set
purusant to Torrns Case No. 13819, as shown by the plot of survey
on file in the Office of the Registrar of Titles .as Doc. No. 560982.
>-(f)
l (f)W
UJ u zz j :r: w
l l (JO
::J -:; J < (f) .,... UJ
I
iii a::
'l CJ
• l
!~~ ~ \ /,. . \
g~~~.-i 1
\ ', I !•f: r ' I
-·-·-·--·-·-·-·--·--·--·--·-·-·-· 1.;. _, -· I-·-·-·-\_ I I,;:-I : /
I{°:. I f
It.. • .' I /
;/.'~ I j
/i::-11,..-// ff! .// '/'" ;/ 1; /
""--
\
I
.\
\
N
()
• C ~ • ~ 1. J,, ~ % J t
~,q? i & ~ g ii h
~Hl
!iJE i 5 ~;
J:8; i
j ~ ~ 3 ! i s
0
"'
Cl :i5
(!) C.
3, u.,
Cl<.:> < < O:z
i~ !::o
"'
\ ',
\
\ ',
i
\
\
\
i
I I
i
I
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
I
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
I
\
\
__ .. -
I
I
I
I
I
\ I, I
\\,, \
i \ i
\.,, i
i \ /
•. / ' ,,·
·, . .....__ ____ --::---···•'
.. ----··--··-.--·-··
·-··-··-··-··-··-··-··
------.--------------------
.. -·· --·-··-··-··-•'-
__ .. -[-.. ___________ _
-·--· .----· --·-,,
-----..... i --·-----
--·-
',·
t ;,
I
I
I
···· ...
...... 1.
·~~~\. ..
-t/S\
i
' i
i
i
i
/
I
!
\ /
\1
'
..I
.JI
-"
..l
-'
RUN DATE : 12/19/2006
38 11-117-23 23 0008
1491 SHORELINE DR
J C KRIER & R C KRIER
JANET C KRIER
149 1 SHORELINE DR
WAYZATAMN 5539 1
38 11 -117-23230016
1480 GREEN TREES RD
C&SPLATOU
CARL & SUSAN PLATOU
1480 GREEN TREES RD
WAYZATAMN 5539 1
38 l l -ll7-23 32 00 16
38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
GM DANKO & N R DANKO
GEORGE M & NANCY R DANKO
15 10 GREEN TREES RD
WAYZATA MN 5539 1
38 l l -ll7-23 32 0019
1280 BRACKETTS POINT RD
R S JOHNSON & B K JOHNSON
ROBBIN SIB KRISTINE JOHNSON
1280 BRACKETTS POINT RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
~thPrlf &,
HENNEPIN c;oUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM (PROPERTY O .... llRS LIST)
38 ll-ll7-23 23 00 14
1520 GREEN TREES RD
DD RYERSE JR&MLRYERSE
DORANCE D RYERSE
1520 GREENTREES RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 l l -ll7-23 32 00 10
1265 BRACKETTS POINT RD
ROGER D O'SHAUGHNESSEY
ROGER D O'SHAUGHNESSEY
10562 ESTATE DR
EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347
38 ll-ll7-23 32 00 17
1300 BRACKETTS POINT RD
GEORGES PILLSBURY ET AL
GEORGES PILLSBURY
90 l MARQUETTE A VE #2630
MPLS MN 55402
38 11-117-23 32 0020
1400 BRACKETTS POINT RD
JAMES R & MARY J JUNDT
JAMES R & MARY J JUNDT
1400 BRACKETTS POINT RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 l l-ll7-23 23 00 15
1510 GREEN TREES RD
GM DANKO & N R DANKO
GEORGE M & NANCY R DANKO
1510 GREEN TREES RD
WAYZATAMN 5539 1
38 11-117-23 32 0015
38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
DD RYERSE JR & ML RYERSE
DORANCE D RYERSE
1520 GREENTREES RD
WAYZATAMN 5539 1
38 l l -ll7-23 32 0018
1220 BRACKETTS POINT RD
JULE M HANNAFORD IV ET AL
JULE M HANNAFORD IV &
ELIZABETH A HANNAFORD
1220 BRACKETTS POINT RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 ll-ll7-23 32 0021
1200 BRACKETTS POINT RD
NOBLE PROPERTIES OF MN LP
NOBLE PROPERTIES OF MN LP
l5250WAYZATA BLVD #l 05
WAYZATAMN 5539 1
I CERTIFY THA THE F
AS IT APPE l:r~ D
DA T E : -'-l-=2--c....+-.L,_V''--1-l ~c...::..._ BY: -+--1-cc.....:.~=>-;:_.-,:;:_!L..,.~::c..._-4"-c.......u
PAGE: 1
Hennepin County Variance M ~---Page 1 of 1
(15) I (16)
I
I 11-117-23-23
(8)
(1 6) (21 )
(10)
(19)
10-117-2;1-41
(17)
I .
I
Parcel Information: Date Printed: 12/19/2006 2:01:43 PM
Parcel ID: 11-117-23-32-0010
Owner Name: ROGER D O'SHAUGHNESSEY
Parcel Address: 1265BRACKETTS POINT RD ORONO MN, 55391
Buffer Size: 150 ft.
Total Parcels: 12
.~·\
.: 11 ,_
.,,._---,---,-,....-•··c..----'-.;.-..-'"""=--=',-,,."----'\,.,_,~;;. . ...,,._Y_· ___ ...,,..,..__.
L, -~
http://bugle/variance/popMap.aspx?PID=1111723320010&Buffer=150&Count=l2&Buff... 12/19/2006
r
i FENCE LOCATION SURVEY FOR //
ROGER D. O'SHAUGHNESSY
IN LOT 10, REARRANGEMENT OF ORONO POINT /
____ HEN~ COUNTY, MINNESOTA __ _----/ /
/
/
S 89°03' 41" E ----------431.80_ -__ ----. q O. R_?. N ~7.8815 ----------/ // /
639.2---r-------n---/,-----
___ -----:-~9"03'~~--~3455 ___ .,__-•~-~-~ ,'
iif~or • .. {·• ... , _.....,....-
LAKE
--~----------------------
0 ~
0
°-!
~
~
"' "'
EXISTtlG FENCE-: -.
~
"' 0
0
(X)
<p ~
Ol
{
I \\
\
\
\
""-""-\
929.4 CONT~ LH:·--....
MINNETONKA
SMITH BAY I
I
I_
\L7 I I
\ I
I
1-, I I ;~_,, I I
I
I I I
----
7 0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ii
I
\ \ I\ '\ I\ \ I
\\\\ \ \
\ \ \ U> \ \ \
0
--1
__,
LOT 2
::::i:J
r7
).>
::0
::::i:J
).>
--;.7
C)
;Ti
I I J \\ \q\ \ \ ' S,:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES (from City of Orono records) ----------------
A troct of land comprised of port of Lot 10 and port of the
accretions of Lots 9 and 10 al! in Rearrangement of Orono
Point, which land is particularly described as beginning at
a point on the North line of Government Lot 3, Section 11,
Township 117, Range 23, distant 431.8 feet East of the West
Quarter corner of said Section 11: thence East along said
North line to its intersection with the extension of the
westerly line of Lot 3 in Rearrangement of Orono Point;
thence southeasterly along the extension of the westerly
line of said Lot 3 to an intersection with a line drawn
from the westerly line of Lot 1 in Rearrangement of Orono
Point; thence southwesterly along said parallel line and
its extension to an intersection with a line drawn parallel
to and 20 feet westerly, measured at right angles, from the
extension of the westerly line of Lot 3, in Rearrangement
of Orono Point; thence southeasterly along said last described
parallel line to a point thereon 583.95 feet northwesterly
from the northwesterly corner of Lot 5 in Rearrangement of
Orono Point, as measured along said parallel line and its
extension; thence southerly and southwesterly along a tangential
curve to the right with a radius of 221.17 feet, a distance of
169.38 feet; thence southwesterly along a line tangent to said
last described curve a distance of 5 feet; thence southwesterly
along a tangential curve to the right with a radius of 445.72
feet a distance of 119.25 feet; thence southwesterly along a
line tangent to said lost described curve a distance of 107.3
feet; thence westerly, deflecting to the right 44 degrees 42
minutes, a distance of 79.3 feet, more or less, to the shore of
Lake Minnetonka; thence northerly along said shore to its
intersection with a line drawn south, parallel to the extension
of the West line of said Section 11 from the point of beginning;
thence north along said last described parallel line to the point
of beginning, according to the recorded plat thereof.
The boundaries of which are marked by Judicial Landmarks set
persuont to Torrens Cose No. 13819, as shown by the plot of survey
on file in the Office of the Registrar of Titles as Doc. No. 560982.
o denotes iron marker
(908.3) : denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum
j910.8I : denotes proposed spot elevation, mean sea level datum
--910--: denotes existing contour line, mean sea level datum
-----ffiQ±}---: denotes proposed contour line, mean sea level datum
Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum.
This survey shows the boundaries of the above described property,
and the proposed location of a proposed house thereon. It does not
purport to show any other improvements or encroachments.
HOUSE RE\llSEll TO w8Ul.OING PER~ HOUSE PL,,t.t,;w SP£Cf'ICAT\ONS
AJ'.l01TIONM. TOPOGRAPHY &: TR££S AT NORTH (Nil Of' LOT
W"LLS REVISED, WALKW ... Y, &: OOCt< AO[l(O PER ARCKl(CT
PROf'OSEO CONTOVRS SHOWN AR( SHOii( FROM ARCHITECT
DESIGNED
DRAWN
ECO
CHECKED
MSG
I
I I I
R!P / -I RAP
I I I
I I
\
~
.._,o' () '.S :'\o~
~
.'? ......-,.......... ...........
,.......... ...........
'\
\_ 0 I
PROJECT
\\ \ \ \ \ 0
\\ \ \ \ \ --l
(;-!
/-, <;.)
' -7
GRONBERG AND
ASSOCIATES, INC.
Clvl E:nglM«1t. Land Si>-veyon,, Land Plamera
4-46 N. WIiow Drive, Long Ld<e, ~ 55356
1152-473-4141
jT]
7
-l
0
"T]
ROGER D. O'SHAUGHNESSEY
10562 ESTATE DR.
EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55347-4862
Wells Fargo Bank Minnesota, N.A.
Minneapolis, MN 55479
www.wellsfargo.com
8743
·\
December 21, 2006
VIA MESSENGER
Melanie Curtis
City of Orono
2750 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356
Re: 1265 Bracketts Point Road
Application of Roger D. O'Shaughnessy
Dear Ms. Curtis:
Fredri/c son
lll-& BYRON, P.A.
This letter is written on behalf of our client, Roger D. O'Shaughnessy. This package contains
Mr. O'Shaughnessy's application for variance relating to the fence at his home at 1265 Bracketts
Point Road. Enclosed please find the following:
1. Completed pre-application meeting form;
2. Our check in the amount of $1,200.00 payable to the City of Orono;
3. Certified property owner's list including, list, labels, and map for property owners within
3 5 0 feet; and
4. Executed Data Privacy Advisory.
5. Completed Variance Application form;
6. Completed hardship documentation form;
7. Three full sized copies of the "as-built" survey;
8. Three sets of color copies illustrating the fence from various perspectives; and
9. A set of Mr. O'Shaughnessy's previous application materials , as you requested.
. _ __,,, / --··/
_:,._..::;,,,,.,,. __,,
Attornkvs & Advisors Fredrikson & Byron, P.A.
maid 612.492.7000 200 South Sixth Street, Suite 4000
fax 612.492.7077
www,. fred I aw.com
Minneapolis, Minnesota
55402-1425
MEMBER OF THE WORLD SERVICES GROUP OFF I CES
A Worldwide Network of Profess,onal Service Providers Minneapo li s, London, & Monterrey, Mexico
Melanie Curtis
December 21 , 2006
Page 2
You are welcome to contact me if you need any additional information. Thank you for your
assistance.
Very truly yours ,
Susan D. Steinwall
Attorney at Law
Direct Dial: 612.492.7171
Email: ssteinwall@fredlaw.com
SDS :jcs:2956434
Enclosure
cc: Roger D . O 'Shaughnessy (w/ applications and narrative only)
:1
' . _.. -,..,... -~~·
~' //i
; ';j t .. :\
\~J
Street Address :·
2750 Kelley Par1<way
Orono, MN 55356
Main: 952-249--4600
Fax: 952-249-4616
Mailing Address.:
PO Box66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066
For Office Use Only:
City Planner:
Meeting Date/Time:
PC Date:
What is the purpose of a pre-application meeting?
Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal, inform them of the
procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create
opportunities or problems for the proposal.
PROPERTY INFORMATION:
Site Address: 1265 Bracket ts Point Road
Property Identification Number (PIN): ....,...,.11_-_1_17_-_2_3_-3_2_-_00_1_0 __________ _
Zoning District: LR-lA Size of Property: 144,491 square feet
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
D Average Setback □ Side Yard Setback □ Rear Yard Setback
D Hardcover □ Lot Coverage □ Lot Area
Iii Other: Fence height variance
□ Front Yard Setback
D Lot Width
Applicant's HARDSHIP: Applicant has received the Hardship Documentation Form,
Initials: _____ understands it as it has been explained to them, and is aware that it must
be completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal variance
application
OTHER INFORMATION:
-.-:-:-.,_
~ .... :
-------------~------~---~--
Hennepin County
Taxpayer Services Department
C ,,
'
_¥!_
10-117-23-14-
' . \ lo~ '❖
' \ (15}
I
I GR~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1 ~
~ <
" a
TREES ON
AGER LAKE
1
I ,.--------~-.:1---;1~
I
I
I
I
I
I
<p~;~ei1ri .... ~.1·11'72332001 o···
tlo~!i~: ~~111.ller 1265 ·. ··.. . . . . . .
•· Street Name BRACKETTS POINT R
. not'a'/;9~1i/i-J68/dtir h7ap:)t rep'rese;ts a. conipilation atiHrarmat/a,f
and data from City,. County, and State road authorities and other sources.
RUN DA TE: 4/14/2004
38 1011723140012
.·OP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
'.ih!ER NAME RP BURWELL & B E BURWELL
1,XP A YER RODNEY P BURWELL
,,,,ME/ADDR 7901 XERXES AVES #201
MPLS MN 55431
:OP ADDR
38 1111723230009
1489 SHORELINE DR
,\VI\IER NAME R K NEWKIRK&N JNEWKIRK
, .. XPA YER R K NEWKIRK & NJ NEWKIRK
' ,IVIE/ADDR 1489 SHORELINE DR
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 1111723230016
;·;;OP ADDR 1480 GREEN TREES RD
l'.\/NER NAME C & S PLATOU
",XPAYER CARL&SUSANPLATOU
!;\IVIE/ADDR 1480 GREEN TREES RD
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 1111723320016
1'0P ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
1\'✓NER NAME GM DANKO & N R DANKO
•·,XI' A YER GEORGE M & NANCY R DANKO
:,-Jv!E/ADDR 1510 GREEN TREES RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 1111723320019
ADDR 1280 BRACKETTS POINT RD
; WNER NAME JAMES V NYCE/BEYERL Y H NYCE
.\XPAYER JAMES V NYCE/BEVERLY HNYCE
1• •.1v!E/ADDR 1280 BRACKETTS POINT RD
WAYZATA MN 55391
;,OPADDR
;WNER NAME
AXPAYER
38 1111723320013
38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
JOHN C NOBLE TRUSTEE
JOID-J,e'N,OBLE
I
/J&+-vY(
CuvL v( '-··-·--
, !/,fv!E/ADDR 1200 BRACKETTS PT RD
WAYZATA MN 55391 1)1
HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM
PROPERTY OWNERS LIST
38 1011723140015
PROP ADDR 1100 MILLSTON RD
OWNER NAME RP BURWELL & EE BURWELL
TAXPAYER RODNEYPBURWELL
NAME/ADDR 7901 XERXESAVES#201
BLOOMINGTON MN 55431
38 1111723230014
PROP ADDR 1520 GREEN TREES RD
OWNER NAME DD RYERSE JR & ML RYERSE
TAXPAYER DO RANCE D RYERSE
NAME/ADDR 1520 GREENTREES RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 1111723320010
PROP ADDR 1265 BRACKETTS POINT RD
OWNER NAME ROGER D O'SHAUGHNESSEY
TAXPAYER ROGERDO'SHAUGHNESSEY
NAME/ADDR 10562 ESTATE DR
EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347
38 1111723320017
PROP ADDR 1300 BRACKETTS POINT RD
OWNER NAME GEORGES PILLSBURY ET AL
TAXPAYER
NAME/ADDR
GEORGE S PILLSBURY
901 MARQUETTE AVE #2630
MPLS MN 55402
38 1111723320020
PROP ADDR 1400 BRACKETTS POINT RD
OWNER NAME JAMES R&MARY J JUNDT
TAXPAYER JAMES R&MARY J JUNDT
NAME/ADDR 1400 BRACKETTS POINT RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 1111723320001
PROP ADDR 1200 BRACKETTS POINT RD
OWNER NAME JOHN CETRUSTEE
TAXPAYER JOHNC OB E
NAME/ ADDR 1200 BRA TIS PT RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 1111723230008
PROP ADDR 1491 SHORELINE DR
OWNER NAME JANET C KIERNAN
TAXPAYER JANETCKRIER
NAME/ADDR 1491 SHORELINE DR
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 1111723230015
PROP ADDR 1510 GREEN TREES RD
OWNER NAME GM DANKO & N R DANKO
TAXPAYER GEORGE M & NANCY R DANKO
NAME/ADDR 1510 GREEN TREES RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 1111723320015
PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
OWNER NAME D D RYERSE JR & M L RYERSE
TAXPAYER DORAN CED RYERSE
NAME/ADDR 1520 GREENTREES RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 1111723320018
PROP ADDR 1220 BRACKETTS POINT RD
OWNER NAME JULE M HANNAFORD IV ET AL
TAXPAYER JULEM HANNAFORD IV &
NAME/ ADDR ELIZABETH A HANNAFORD
1220 BRACKETTS POINT RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 1 ll 1723320021
PROP ADDR 1200 BRACKETTS PT RD
OWNER NAME JOHN C NOBLE TRUSTEE
TAXPAYER JOHNCNOBLE
NAME/ADDR 1200 BRACKETTS PT RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
PAGE: 1
RUN DA TE: 4/14/2004 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM
PROPERTY OWNERS LIST
I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENfED ARE AN ACCURATE AND
TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS
OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTM~ENT, TO THE BEST~
OFMYKNOWLEDGEANDBELIEF. 11 (u i
DATE 1-7'-0 _ BY • ~--~ ........ ~.-----
PAGE: 2
Jam Free Printing
Use Avery® TEMPLATE 5160®
38 1011723140012
RODNEY P BURWELL
7901 XERXES AVES #201
MPLS MN 55431
38 1111723230009
R K NEWKIRK & NJ NEWKIRK
1489 SHORELINE DR
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 1111723230016
CARL & SUSAN PLA TOU
1480 GREEN TREES RD
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 1111723320016
GEORGE M & NANCY R DANKO
1510 GREEN TREES RD
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 1111723320019
JAMES V NYCE/BEYERL Y H NYCE
1280 BRACKETTS POINT RD
WAYZATA MN 55391
1t'
I' I
ii
'I
-
38 1011723140015
RODNEY P BURWELL
7901 XERXES AVES #201
BLOOMINGTON MN 55431
38 1111723230014
DORANCE D RYERSE
1520 GREENTREES RD
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 1111723320010
www.avery.com
1'-800-GO-AVER\
ROGER D O'SHAUGHNESSEY
10562 ESTATE DR
EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347
38 1111723320017
GEORGES PILLSBURY
90 I MARQUETTE A VE #2630
MPLS MN 55402
38 1111723320020
JAMES R & MARY J JUNDT
1400 BRACKETTS POINT RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
@ AVERY® 5160®
38 1111723230008
JANET C KRIER
1491 SHORELINE DR
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 1111723230015
GEORGE M & NANCY R DANKO
1510 GREEN TREES RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 1111723320015
DORANCE D RYERSE
1520 GREENTREES RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 1111723320018
JULE M HANNAFORD IV &
ELIZABETH A HANNAFORD
1220 BRACKETTS POINT RD
WAYZATAMN 55391
38 1111723320021
JOHNCNOBLE
1200 BRACKETTS PT RD
WAYZATA MN 55391
DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY
In accordance with M.S. 13.04, Subd. 2, "Rights of subjects of data", we would like
to inform you that your request for a permit or license from the City of Orono or any of its
departments may require you to furnish certain private or confidential information.
You are notified that:
1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for
the permit or license requested.
2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny
the permit or license,
3. The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to
the extent necessary to process the permit or license.
4. If your requested permit or license requires Council action to approve, some
information may become public.
5. You have certain rights under M.S. 13.04 (see following page) to review
private data on yourself.
6. Your full name is required to process this application or permit.
Roger D. O'Shaughnessy
First Middle Last
10562 Estate Drive
Address
Eden Prairie, MN 55347 (952) 935-1722
City Zip Phone
8
Application# ___ _
Date Received ----Amount Paid ___ _
CITY OF ORONO -GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION
PROPERTY LOCATION
Site Address 1265 Bracketts Point Rd., Orono MN 55391
Type of Application to be Filed __ c_U_P_ch_im_ne_y_h_e_ig_ht _________ _
Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 11...,.1 u~23,...32-0010
APPLICANT
Name Roger D. 0' Shalighnessy
Phone (home) ________ Phone(work) (952) 935-1722
Addressl0562 Estate Drive CityEden Prairie Zip_5_5_3_47 __ _
OWNER (if different than applicant)
Name Roger O'Shaughnessy
Phone (home) _________ Phone (work) _(_.,_9_5_2-'---) _9_3_5_-_1_72_2 __ _
Address same City _______ Zip ___ _
Date~ Acquired · May 2003 (month/year)
I (do)~also own the adjacent parcels of land.
FEES -CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS -
___ $600.00 Residential Accessory Use
___ $600.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.)
___ $600.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments
___ $600.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg
___ $600.00 Commercial/Industrial Use
---$600.00 Land Alteration+ Permit
--Grading and filling -designated wetland or floodplain
__ Grading and filling -501 cu. yd. or more
__ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore
PRO/PIO -see Fee Schedule ---
---$250.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application)
___ After-the-Fact Fee -Double Current Application Fee
OTHER APPLICATIONS .
___ $600.00 Commercial Site Plan Review(+ consultant fees)
$600,00 Vacation ---
---$600.00 Easement Vacation
$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ---___ $.600.00 Rezoning (PUD -refer to fee schedule)
___ $600.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
___ $100.00 Appeals
Other -see Fee Schedule ---
6
REQUIRED SUBMITTALS
1 .
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
__ Completed Application Form.
__ Describe request in detail.
__ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' of the subject property,
labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin
County Department of Finance, Government Center, A-603 300 South 6th
Street, Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910).
___ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) -refer to handout for
survey information.
___ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey.
__ Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations
involve changes in elevation (grades).
___ List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in
the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current
owner(s).
___ Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements).
___ As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other
persons you wish notified of this application.
YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 3 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS AND 1 COPY
FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS
SUBMITTED. (Staff will require scaled drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be
submitted.)
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 Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete.
Initials of Clerical Staff: _____________ Date _______ _
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE
The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the
Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional s (staff time not covered by original fee
payment) and/or unusual expenses incur~ review oft ·s application, and certifies that
the information su · djs true and cor ectct{ ~be bes.:-t" _.,,, is/her knowledge. / / • I
Applicant's signature "~-~-~J!t',;;-Ll,,;'..-"111½ Date '1: -Z.a lf1'-t
,;/
OWNER'S SIGNATURE
The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this apilication and further authorized
reasonable entry onto the property by Cit staff, consultants, agents, commission
members, and Council members for P~, es of inve tigation and verification of this
request.
... IJI~ ~ Date 1/~ )o'¾ Owner's signature
Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices v anning Commission Meeting.
Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third ,onday of each mo · .· Applicants must be present
at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning C . · mission and Cou . ii. If an applicant is unable to
attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place
and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting.
7
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
APPLICANT: Roger D. O'Shaughnessy
RESIDENCE: 1265 Bracketts Point Road, Orono, Minnesota
The subject property is located in Zoning District LR-lA. Section 78-305 of the Orono Code
requires that no structure or building in the LR-lA District shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or 30 feet in
height, except as provided in Section 78-1366. Section 78-1366(a)(9) provides that the height of
a chimney may be increased by conditional use permit by 50%. Under these regulations, the
height of a chimney in the LR-lA District may be increased up to 45 feet in height.
The applicant seeks to obtain a conditional use permit that would permit construction of several
chimneys at the Bracketts Road premises, none of which would exceed 40 feet, 8 inches in
height, all as shown on the side view elevations. See, specifically, the height limit diagram.
#2956464\1
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
LIST OF LEGAL NAMES
APPLICANT: Roger D. O'Shaughnessy
RESIDENCE: 1265 Bracketts Point Road, Orono, Minnesota
The applicant is also the owner of the property:
Mr. O'Shaughnessy is not married.
#2956464\1
Roger D. O'Shaughnessy
10562 Estate Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55347
' '
_...,
····!l.:R ,h-•
--------------------------------------··-··--··-··
[11!,r,,.:,:;~,__.,.
Dl::Jl:ill~f;Wll)UlllmMMIYtT
P'ltll'CIS!DCOHfV.8
•-.o,-D--HMCD.U.
•••-••-•-· • PIIIIPtlll"W.,:
~·,,.', ::~ '-"---------•-.•:..-•-·---------·-___ ,,,_ ---;:~,Y{~', ....... _ ---------:--:?~r--.. , .. :'··· ..
'.1-.:,,,ci.-.,,. .·
·,,
------·-----·------------·------·-·-·-~--. __ ·_. ___ . __ ·_··---------. _______ ·_. ______ ··-··------------
---·--·--·--·-··----·-···-·----
·=---:.
O'SHAUGt,v,!ESSY RESIDENCE
SITE MAlERIALSAN~ PLANTING PLAN ~otor-v.....,,,,.r..,, L1.0
·------------------
l!i DEPOT AYEJt£ r.11romt .......
$Ot SLI •tt
f,tJI "8 1lit w~.~
/ ,·
,/
-✓-~
/ ·.::-. ...... --~~-....
... ~ ..
•.~ .. ~-
h,
.:·_.:·1".·:-._.. . .. !/:\ :,~· '•~.
~/:·· j' .. ,·~ ... ·.·· ..... ). \', ',.,· .
I ·200F£ET
• • ,ol.' ••••• ,
•' \-: #
0'6HAUGHNESSY RESIDENCE
SITE 6Ecl'ION
,_ ___ • -~-----~ , ... _, ___ c~•OfamVILWtfllW-~ -·y.
HHM ··+ .. ·-----
L1.2
City of Orono
Variance Application
Street Address:
2750 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356
"Application #
Date.Received:
Amount Paid:
Staff:
Fee: $600 Main: 952-249-4600
fax: 952-249-4616
Mailing.Address: .
P.O. Box 66
Renew9 l-: --;;$:-;::3-;:;:00;::-----,------,.-
After-the-fact: $1,200 Double Fee
Crystal Bay, MN 55323--.'}066
This application form must be completed ln full. Ap(Icant will be notified within_ ·15 days as to the status of the
application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas.
PROPERTY INFORMATION:
Site Address: 1265 Bracketts PointtRoad
Property Identification Number (PlN): ll-117-23-32-0010 .
(Attach legal description to application if;-:n--o=;t-:'in~c'-";lu-dt"ec....-d~o-n=-;.cth;-=e-:'-. ,.-s--:-Ll_rv_e_y-;-. )-----:----------
0 ate Property Acquired (month/year):May 2003 □ Yes, I.own the adjacent parcels.
Present use of property: ~ Residential □ Other ·· ·
Zoning District _L_R_-_lA _______ _
APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal na;-:-:es a~d marital status required for ~ach int~rested party)
Name: Roger D. O'Shaughnessy (unmarried) · ·
Phone (home): ____________ Phone (work): (952) 935-1722
Address: 10562 Estate Drive, Eden Prairie, MN 55347 --'---'-----------'--'---
Email: ctracy_@ccJ.rdinal~orp.com Fax: (952) 935-5538 ---------------
0 W NE R INFORMATION: (Complete legal names 2::d marital status required for each .interested party)
Name: same as above ·
Phone (home_): ____________ Phone (wqrk):
Address:
Email: ____________________ Fax:
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost:
Jescribe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary):
$1stJ,OtJU,oo
l,5~~ u)~
(:hAL-t)
The Applicant seeks a variance from the City of Orono's Lakeshore Hard Cover and Land Alteration
Regulations (Orono City Code at Section 78-282). That Ordinance prohibits excavating, filling, hard cover,
temporary or permanent structures within 7 5 feet of the shoreline. The Applicant requests a variance from this
requirement to permit construction of 1) slatted boardwalk to permit access from the house to the lake without
disturbing an area to be replanted in native marsh and shore land vegetation thus eliminating the sod; and 2) a
fence paralleling Bracketts Point Road at the south end of the site. In addition, the Applicant seeks a variance to
allow grading and construction of retaining walls in the floodplain to facilitate on-site management of
stormwater runoff from Bracketts Point Road and the Applicant's property and to ensure that the Applicant will
have access to his property during wet periods.
REQUIRED SUBMiTTALS:
All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your
application to be processed.
□ Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. _
□ Completed Application Form
□ Completed Hardship Documentation Form
□ Certified Property Owners List -owners within 150' of the subject property, labels ahd plat map.
List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance,
Government Center, A-603 300 South 6th Street, Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910
□ Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the requirements
listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or
11" x 17" for reproduction.
□ Completed hardcover calculation workslieets (as provided within the variance packet).
□ Topographic survey -including existing and pmposed elevations. Provide one copy 8_.5" x 11"
or 11" x 17" for reproduction. -
□ Sketch_es or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17").
□ Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project.*
APPLICANrs ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by -the Planning
Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or
consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is
true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely
responsible for submitting a complete a ication being aware that upon failure to do so, the
staff has no alternative but to reje i I unt I it i~omplete or to recommend the request for
denial of the request regardless of lot tial __ ,erit. ,, / L
Applicant's Signature: _-r_~_~_ -_ ----"""--.:_1
_____ ...,_.,.,'-•~-... _-:_7:_:~=---Date: 4 _ 21? ~' f
Applicant's Signature: , Date:
OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
The owner hereby acknowledges and a ees to this application and further authorizes reasonable
entry onto the property _by City -ff, consultan agents, Commission & Council Members for
purposes of inves~j_9tion and verif i 6,/4f this vtiest.
Owner's Signature: j'/--Date:
Owner's Signature: Date:
Applicant must have all submitta!s into the City o es 25 days before the Planning Commission
Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month.
Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and
Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to
have an authorized representative ·attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Pianner
assigned to your project.
Pagelof3
HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM
This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application
will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is
complete and submitted to the City.
Minnesota State Statue Section 394.27, Subdivision 7 requires that a hardship be
demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted. The hardship must be unique to the
property as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic
situations are not considered valid hardships. In order for an application to be heard by
the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be
demonstrated.
HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP?
This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship
exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a hardship,
address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible.
Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the
variance is justified. The information the City receives is what is used in determining a
denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will not be considered.
Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request (some may
not apply): ·
1.
2.
3.
"The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under
conditions allowed by the official controls."
See attached.
"The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not
created by the landowner." The variance is. made necessary by the unusual
configuration of lot especially at its southern end together with
elevation and route of Bracketts Point Road.
"The variance, if granted, will not.alter the essential character of the locality."
The variance, if granted, will be consistent with the character
of the locality.
4. "Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if
reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter."
See attached.
Page 2 of 3
5. "Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct
sunlight for so[ar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered
construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in
harmony with this Chapter."
Not applicable.
6. "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a
variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone
where the affected person's land is located. ll
7.
8.
Use is appropriate to applicable zoning.
"The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a
one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling."
Not applicable.
"The special conditions applying to the structure or land· in question are peculiar
to such property or immedi~tely adjoining property."
See attached.
9. , "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in
which said land is located."
10.
11.
See attached.
"The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment
of a substantial property right of the applicant."
The variance, if granted, will provide access to the lake, ensure
driveway access during wet periods, manage stormwater effectively,
and will-provide for safety, security, and privacy.
"The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety,
comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning
Code."
The variance, if granted, will enhance environmental conditions and
will provide for safety,· sP-curity, and privacy.
12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the
applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty."
See attached.
Hardship Statement
Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be described in the above criteria, describe the
unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance
with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if
necessary):
See attached
Boardwalk:
HARDSHIP STATEMENT
1265 Bracketts Point Road
The Applicant intends to replace the sodded lawn currently lying within the 75 foot shoreline set
back area with a meadow consisting of native floodplain shrubs and grasses. The restoration of
the shoreland setback area from sod to native floodplain shrubs and grasses will provide a buffer
bordering Lake Minnetonka that will help protect water quality, stabilize the lakeshore bank,
prevent erosion, and also assist in filtering out nutrients, sediments and other pollutants from
entering the lake.
The Applicant also seeks to maintain access to the lakeshore from his home. For that purpose,
the Applicant proposes to construct a slatted wood boardwalk. The boardwalk will be suspended
above the ground surface. The ground surface beneath the boardwalk will be stabilized with
erosion control fabric to prevent erosion in those areas where vegetation is not expected to
survive. For most of its extent, the boardwalk will be no greater than six feet in width. Near the
lake, the width of the boardwalk will be increased up to 15 feet, to help facilitate transition to a
dock, which is to be constructed in the future, and further protect the restored natural vegetation
from "staging" activities near the lakeshore.
If the variance were not granted, the Applicant would be unable to access the lakeshore without
damaging the native floodplain grasses to be planted in the shoreline set back area. The variance
is necessary to preserve the enjoyment of a substantial property right of the Applicant, i.e.,
access to and enjoyment of Lake Minnetonka, while encouraging the voluntary restoration of the
lakeshore area to native floodplain grasses and shrubs. Given the substantial benefit that Lake
Minnetonka will enjoy by this voluntary restoration, granting the proposed variance will not
impair the public health and safety, but rather will serve to encourage such values.
Fencing
The Applicant proposes to construct a wire mesh fence along the portions of the property that
fronts Bracketts Point Road and County Road 15. The purpose of the fence is to provide the
Applicant with security for his property, privacy and safety for Applicant's grandchildren who
will play on the property.
Only that portion of the fence that parallels Bracketts Point Road will encroach into the shoreline
set back area. This .area is at the southerly end of the prope1iy and runs for a distance of
approximately 56 feet. At the property lines that are "perpendicular" to the lakeshore at both the
north and the south ends of the property, any necessary screening from adjacent roads and
properties would be achieved through relatively dense plantings of native shrubs and trees, rather
than with a fence.
The requested variance is made necessary only as a result of the unusual configuration of
Bracketts Point Road. To the south of the Applicant's property, Bracketts Point Road
encroaches into the shoreline setback area and closely follows the lake shore. To be effective,
the fence should not stop arbitrarily, but rather should be allowed to follow the entire length of
the property as it follows Bracketts Point Road. Granting of the variance application is necessary
to provide the Applicant with substantial enjoyment of his property by providing privacy,
security and child safety.
Retaining Wall and Grading.
As shown in the topographical survey, the elevation of the southern half of the Applicant's
property is below the surface elevation of Bracketts Point Road. As a consequence, street
storm.water has traditionally drained onto the site. To provide storm.water rate control and water
quality control, the Applicant proposes to construct a retention area (i.e., an infiltration area) in
the southerly portion of the prope1iy. On the easterly portion of the infiltration area (i.e.,
"upland" or towards Bracketts Point Road) a stone retaining wall will be constructed to enhance
the capacity of the infiltration area in a relatively flat portion of the site. A swale will be
constructed to direct stonnwater runoff from Bracketts Point Road and the property to the
infiltration area. Because the topography in this area is extremely flat and only slightly above
the Ordinary High Water Elevation of Lake Minnetonka, drain tile will be placed under the swale
and retaining wall to provide minimal gravity flow (at 0.4% slope) into the infiltration area. No
outlet directly into the lake is being proposed. The retaining wall will not encroach into the
lakeshore setback area, although the grading to create the infiltration area will encroach. The
infiltration area and swale will be planted with native floodplain species and it is expected that
the vegetation will provide some degree of water quality treatment.
In addition, it is necessary to elevate the area of the driveway in the floodplain so that the
Applicant may access his property during wet periods or when the elevation of Lake Minnetonka
is higher than normal. The mean high water level of Lake Mim1etonka typically rises by at least
7 inches during the spring and summer. The elevated area of the driveway will be held by two
retaining walls on either side of the driveway entrance from Bracketts Point Road. A culvert will
pass beneath the driveway entrance and through the retaining walls to allow storm.water to
continue to flow through the swale into the infiltration area.
As shown by the attached Site Grading and Drainage Plan, the volume of fill in the floodplain
will be compensated by the volume of the cut into the floodplain. The holding capacity of the
floodplain, thus, should not be diminished, as demonstrated in the enclosed floodplain volume
calculations.
The topography at the southerly end of the site together with the configuration of Bracketts Point
Road as it travels south necessitates that stonnwater handling be addressed in this single family
residential development. The proposed variance will not impair public health or safety; but
rather is expected to advance environmental concerns by handling storm.water runoff from
Bracketts Point Road in an environmentally responsible manner. Finally, by constructing the
infiltration area together with the retaining walls and elevation of the driveway entrance, the
Applicant's access to and enjoyment of his property will be enabled by treating and handling
storm.water from the adjacent street in a controlled and environmentally responsible way.
#2956541 \2
SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' ~ 250-500' 500-1000'
EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE
A. House X = S.F.
Length Width
X = S.F.
X = S.F.
X = S.F.
B. Garage X = S.F.
C. Driveway X = S.F.
X = S.F.
0. Sidewalk X = S.F.
X = S.F.
E. Patio/Deck X = S.F.
X = S.F.
F. Landscape X = S.F.
Underlain X = S.F.
By Plastic X = S.F.
G. Other X = S.F.
TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE S.F. A
TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE S.F. B
A B X 100 = %
PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE
A. House X = main 8703.7 S.F.
Length Width
X = shed 675.6 S.F.
X = S.F.
X = S.F.
B. Garage X = S.F.
C. Driveway X = 6911.2 S.F.
X = S.F.
D. Sidewalk X = S.F.
X = S.F.
E. Patio/Deck X = hot tub 417.5 S.F.
X = terrace/steQs 3279.4 S.F.
F. Landscape X = walls 2107.8 S.F.
Underlain X = S.F.
By Plastic X = S.F.
G. Other X = pool 1092.8 S.F.
TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 23188 S.F. A
TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 95420 S.F. B
A 23188 B 95420 X 100 = 24.3 %
11
SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) @ 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000'
EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE
A. House X = S.F.
Length Width
X = S.F.
X = S.F.
X = S.F.
B. Garage X = S.F.
C. Driveway X = S.F.
X = S.F.
D. Sidewalk X = S.F.
X = S.F.
E. Patio/Deck X = S.F.
X = S.F.
F. Landscape X = S.F.
Underlain X = S.F.
By Plastic X = S.F.
G. Other X = S.F.
TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE S.F. A
TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE S.F. B
A B X 100 = %
PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE
A. House X = S.F.
Length Width
X = S.F.
X = S.F.
X = S.F.
B. Garage X = S.F.
C. Driveway X = S.F.
X = S.F.
D. Sidewalk X = S.F.
X = S.F.
E. Patio/Deck X = 550.1 S.F.
X = S.F.
F. Landscape X = S.F.
Underlain X = S.F.
By Plastic X = S.F.
G. Other X = S.F.
TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 550.1 S.F. A
TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 49071.0 S.F. B
A 550.1 B 49071.0 X 100 = 1.1 %
11
~f'I-C·t/V~ ~~ ( ~~
'EJ!N /3~ f <T -5~/fv~ 'J' ~~ J I
, '5.(7l5 ;;uif /2£:-._u,..t,S,Mt11/';, j,1/~b O __
{r) flr?(cj ~ /h¥-~ ·/0 ;:;:ifuc.&> (!141~
----1-U• I (h>J 0 s 0-E I /¥Jsr;-t--t,r -{'l-ff -rz,//JU,-) I :5-5 I ///&ff ~
· w-zwl.,(/ ()IJ~ A-3-f__ · Pzxu~ 1s:· i/-tlcJwd)
&+rt: A-7 ?)wk; /S 1/ 111/6?!
/mJ~ Is /i 12 ' t/Jf oFfJAVt f10T --
-{4>(/YT7(y-._) ~bt_--t'--"S blL ,!qJVU;> f~~
/. l I ~ frJ ·~ oy ( (IS l-tID~ rf1{I-5
.. ____ sJW-~€:.s/~~1/JG (>10 ;;7fCc.,g, SiD~·
---~ tJr /2z__::10c:e -M/~f) /U/½~'7?) //-vi/u~Y
lf'->~~ ;Jiµ D/Jl./4 _ &g-//l) !f.,_{)JA . .J,, 4!,t;; 5f00·Wlt.A·w,,<Jl
t
!fi 16~(1 if~~
&o ·J/;-1-UiJ.Jfy~vvut:> '1i ~12-.5''-/f~.S J}NV -£ fi;AJ
e-M l).,1JU Pr$ J ~u t Gt~ s -4'o/s 11 ~ /V t;tJ !ft--wb1,vt,.0 t~
{/J'l)~''1 ..?v f00w Ng ;..fatue A ~c,,J /J/42;,W,1_~~
. ~/0 1J'RJV'l?,iit0 ~ 2 5is7J J,c. .
~> frtJD .Stz>~er t J. C'of\J\/7 ~~
1)1>t ,0{'--) "'fD ~ V;~ Pow>---uol--~L
-G&P f ~ t I\.) l;\J~l,.. ~ ~~ "'--> ;0 pw t ~ ? tr <;;, i--L r 71/-(2,0._
l r M
W15S'f {NIYL-L-~ ~ -B>/rs.//0~ tfv'-vl--el
-------------· -----
_______ .. -------------··-·
.-----
------------------------------------
.. -------------
-·-...... -·-·-·
-··
GRADING NOTES
I. lnsloll :slaked haybole 3illolion fence at ~ge of proposed
grading as shown. Maintain ho.ybole fence in good condition
throughout project.
2. The locations ol urnitii,s shown on the pion ore opproximote.
The contractor shall cod Dig-Sole to veriry lhe preci:se lotolion
or all ulililies on-site before initiating demoli\ion octivilies and
protect e11i:sling ut.ilitin throughout constn.iclion, My utilities
damaged by cons~ction oelivities wm be repaired by the
c011troctor al no cost to the owner.
J. Provide .somple.s ol materials proposed for u:se for the
rrview of !he Landscape Nchilecl, including Iii, lopsoa, plonling
soil, and poym,enls. Suitable excoYoled materials removed lo
occommodole new cons(rvc:tion moy be used os rdl maleriol
subjeel lo the opprOYOI o( the Londscope Architect. Soil test
reports for tops011 shall be. p,ovided by !he controctor \hrough
the Univet,ity of Mos,achu,etts. s~il lesting laboratory.
4. Promplfy notify the Londscope Arc:hite<:t of unexpected
sub-surface conditions. Conlroctot lo set grod11 stokes showing
Gnu ond devotions for review ond opprovof by the LondscGpe
Nchiteel prior to rough 9"0ding,
S. Perform grading tithin conlroci Limits of Co~struetion,
including adjacent lronsition oreas, to new devotions, levels,
profiles, ond conlour.1 indicated. Pro'lide subgrode :surfaces
porollel to finished .sul'loc:e grodes. Proyide uniform levels ond
slopes between new el11Yotions ond eiisting grades. Crode
surfoces to assure oreos drci"n owoy from slructure13 ond to
prevent ponding and pockets of ,urfoce dtainoge.
6. Topsoil lo be installed shall be noturol, triable, fertae S011
chcrocterislic of productive !50l1 in the vk:inity, reosonobly free
o( stones. cloy lumps. roots, and other foreign molter. Do not
use muddy topsoi1. Place during dry weather. Allow for 5•
overage depth of topsail screened fOf lawn oreos, and 12•
depth ot plonling areas, e.ccepl os othen,ise indicated on the
drawings. ·
7, Fine grade lopsoa elim:noting rough and low areas to
ensure positive drainage. Moinloin lavets. profiles, and contours
of subgrodes,
8. Protect finish groded oreo, from troffic ond erosion. Keep
free ol tra,h ond de.bth1. Repair ond re-ntobITsh grades ln
seUled,eroded, and dmnoged oreos. Miere completed oreos ore
disturbed by construclion operations ot adverse wtother, scarify,
te-shope, ond compoet to required density.
9. Upon eomplelion of eorU,work operation, eleon oreo1 within
conlroet ~mils, remove tools, ond equipment. Provide site
clear, clean, free of debris, ond suitable for further sile work
operolions.
IO, £:Osting and proposed grodes ore bosed on Survey by
Cronberg & Assc:oeioln doted 5-30-0J, updated -4-15-0-4,
I f. Oroinoge intormo!ion provided by Gronberg a:: As:sociotes.
Eiisling grades ore wy flol in lhi! ort!<I', and only slightly
above. lhe Ordinory High Water Elevation ol Loke Minnetonka.
Thus, there may be times when woler mave:s 5'oflfy through the
drainage swoles ond drain lines, e:speciolly when Loke Minne1onko
is higher than normol,
+1.11~ MOPQS(Q $Pal CiUOt: n.t\'AMH
+(U!.~l =° :a~ =toa.t;.1.;::, nlOli
------~.t-----ci:isn«;OOHTOURnlOU!IUINtY
------Q.31r5·----DmflC fUXl0P\.',N COHlfMI (R:)W 5UR'.tT
PftO'lt!5t:0 (:Ol(t()JII m --··-(11¥,N l,JK£ --··-··-----·-PRQP(;ITT !,K
i ---1--1--+---:---:-:--::------; -----•-------••-••-••-••1---'7""-=~:: .. _._J-:..,_--1-:::::~!:JJ:::•-J-=:::.:.:•.-=:=.M:.V.:_:•.:_:".:_:=;_;Ap_;,;•:.;a_l>m ______ 7
-----------------·r J ----------------------------/ ~
--------i 1 ----------·· I .
GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC.
, I I .
I l
! i
/ !
l 1-£?.E:BY CC:P.rrr T'HAT TH::i PL'-11. ~CH:,-,n?N, Col. ~C'i<T
WAS P~.EP~.R::0 ey f,,£ CR l.'tC(R l,I'( OF:ECT $1.~'lVr"~I >JCi
THAT t Al.I A OU..Y Ll.'.'.iNSa) PPC.ES~Al. fu..,::;?,(E.~ ~ LAl-0
9.P.','00. UCO! n£ LAWS r, iH: smt CF W.tOJi.\.
1''=20'
DATT:
4/1</0-1
O'SHAUGHNESSY
RESIDENCE
STEPHEN STIMSON ASSOCIATES
LANOSCAPE ARCHITECTS, INC
15 DEPOT AVENUE FALMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS
phone SOS 54B 8119 tax SOB 5-48 7718 s.sa@cape.com
St:::U•: O.te; Ofa'nl'!t,y: Cho<:kedt,:
1" = 20' APR 04 KB, CP SS
SITE GRADING AND
DRAINAGE PLAN L 2.0
w v
0
0
TRACKING SHEET
FILE NO. 07-3260
Staff: . ___ _
SITE ADDRESS: 1265 Bracketts Point Rd.
Applicant: Roger D. O'Shaughnessy
Address: 1265 Bracketts Point Rd.
Owner: Roger D. O'Shaughnessy
Address: 1265 Bracketts Point Rd.
Wayzata, mN 55391 Wayzata, MN 55391
□ Meeting with Staff Date: _______ _
□ Application Completed Date: ________ 60 Day: ______ _
□ Incomplete Notice Sent Date: _______ _
Copy of Application Sent to:
__ Engineer _ County DNR MCWD LMCD
D Property Owners Notified: Date: _______ _
□ Legal Notice Published Date: --------
PC Meeting(s): Vote: ---------------------
Vote: ---------------------
Vote: ---------------------
D Notice of PC Action: ---------------------
City Council Meeting(s):
Vote: --------------------
□ Resolution: