HomeMy WebLinkAbout Project PacketCITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA
Land Use Application
LOCATION OF PROPOSA 1� �r o t� ►�rK �'f Y C, K r#
Address
Legal Description -��t, iA ZZScctcoj 4_7
APPLICANT Name C t ►vuc ��}+�t�u�r Tel #47.3
Mailing `
Address Z0 6120L.A�],.J ct G� �' �� LA
OWNER Name N VC K ,.; C tAicc, r Te 1 #
Mailing _
Address `_� A P` ,c
HYPE OF REQUEST
Subdivision $150+$/G: L
/Conditional Use $50
Variance $50
zoning $250
�Riprap $15 C($65)_11
FEE 'I U �i�
Date Rec' d 5 i -
By _i.r
Present Zoning i Present Use ` ^us �n
Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request
Specify Ordinance Requirements
Explain your request and reasons for same `fiy �_' L v t 0 E 5'A 0,0
I If1X10 1Aj -1 t3LQ __ L.L j 4 n % a F?Pc± H(:::)t-, �-- —
VARIANCE -equired - extent of nonconformity
�t Area Setback Front Side Rear
Width Other, explain _
Specify 1, :.ships to property
VARIANCE -equired - extent of nonconformity
.)t Area Setback Front Side Rear
Width Other, explain
Specify 1, .'.ships to property
SUBDIVISION application _�L Residential Other, explain
No. of Lots
CONDITIONAL USE AND OTHER - explain proposed use of property in detail
MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE APPLICATION
(Must be submitted 10 days prior to Planning Commission meeting)
1.
`Application completed
5. Certified Property Owner's list of
2.V
Plat map section
owners within (300')
(1501)- from
3.
Certificate of survey of property
Hennepin Co. Dept. of
Finance
sketch location and setbacks of
A-603 Government Center
proposal
6. Stamped, legal sized
envelope�(#10
4.
Construction plans, if applicable
pre -addressed to each
of the names
on the above list.
���� `f Applicant's
DATE �lR
Signature
DATE Owner's Signature
Applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by
the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission
and Council necessary tt., process this application and further agrees to pay
all fees as t:5t ahlisl,ed by D rdinance.
5/7d
CITY of ORONO
Post Office Box 66 *Crystal Bay. Minnesota 9.5323 • Municipal Offices
Telephone 473-7357
Mr Chuck Van Eeckhout
120 South Brown Road
Long Lake,
Minnesota 55356
NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Date of Meeting _ _ June 11, 1979
Votes: For _ Against
Control No. 479
Variance
Conditional Use Permit
XX Subdivision, Preliminary
Date of Noti:e 6-14-79
RE: 1025 North Brown Road
Planning Commission recommends the following:
Approval: As submitted
Approval: Subject to conditions noted
Approval: Additional information required before Council meeting
Denial: For reasons noted
Tabled: Pending receipt of additional information from applicant
Tabled: Pending review by others, or further Planning Commission
study
X No action required
NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS Planning Commission conceptually approved Your
sketch plan _for _seven lot subdivision. You must submit the following to
proceed with your preliminary application: 1 list of property owners within
300', 2) envelopes (size 10) stam_ped and addressed to each name on list (no
return address). 3) topographic maQ of_Qlat_area _4)-re uq ired septic testing _
for each lot. 5) Certificate of Survey,_ and 6)_ report from Hennepin Soils
Office (staff to receive)
[ Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as:
Planning Commission
Council
njApplicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of
additional information. De.3dline for the _ July 9, 1979,._
meeting is _June. 27,,__1,979_ : or _ July 11, _1979
for the _ July _23�- 1979_ mee t i ng .
In all cases, the application must be continu►-,_1 with the subnittal of
reiuested information within _ six (6) months
or the City will consider th•. application as form,-lly withdrawn.
If the applicant has trouble oi;! -iininy allitior.al. pl-
contact the Zoning Adriiniq,_r�t ;r.
If you desire certifie-i c r- of th.- o f f i i 11 Pl3.. .i. �c-
►i1:1 ar--- aV3. 13` 1? f'C„' Li. 3...:. Z,7:Ii j i CjU;a". r: _
and approval by the Plan:.:. -I; Cc�..iss10n.
#4'7J
TO: Planning commission and Council
FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Asst. Zoning Administrator
DATE: May 16, 1979
SUBJECT: #479 Chuck Van Eeckhout, 1025 North Brown Road
SUBDIVISION
SKETCH PLAN REVIEW
Zoning Distric, RR-1B
The applicant proposes dividing a total 16.62 acres into 7 lots.
There is a aesignated wetland of approximately 1.5 acres that must
be tied inco each lot. It would appear in this sketch that the
developer plans to designate an outlot for the wetland. Staff
has no rfoblem with recommending conceptual approval of sketch plan.
GENERAL REVIEW
ACCESS - to be off Brown Road to be approved by the Public Works
Director. This will be a 50' private road designated
by an outlot with a cul-de-sac (600' in length) with a
turnaround radius of 40' and a right-of-way of 100'.
LOT CONFICURATION:
A. Side Yard Setback - The house location for two of the
lots do not meet the 30' side yard setback.
B. Lot Width - Three lots are considerably shy of the
necessary 200' at the building site.
WETLAND - Lot lines must be drawn through wetlands and designated
by drainage easements.
MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 21, 1979
Page 5
Audrey Heiser represented the applicant. It was
stated that a driveway permit would be required
from Hennepin County Highway Department. She
stated she had contacted them and was informed
that they anticipated no problems but suggested
the access be as far smith as possible. Frahm
questioned the status of vacant land located at
2650 Tonk;iwa Road and asked staff to check it out.
A Public Information Meeting hap been scheduled
for June 11, 1979.
Mr. Van Eeckhout was present. The wetlands are
presently shown as an outlot. Lot lines must be
drawn through wetlands and designated by a
drainage easement. Some of the lots do not meet
the 200' lot width requirement. The plan will
have to be revised to meet this requirement.
Septic testing need to be done.
Hannah moved to approve the Minutes as submitted.
Motion seconded by Adams. Vote: Ayes (7),
Nays (0). Motion passed unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 10:50 P.M.
q
F.NERVEST BUILDERS
325 West Lake Street
SUBDIVISION/VARIANCE
Sketch Plan Review
(#460)
t/CHUCK VAN EECKHOUT
1025 No. Brown Road
SUBDIVISION
Sketch Plan Review
(!1.479)
APPKC`JAL OF MINUTES
MAY 70 1979
ADJOURNMENT
CITY of ORONO
Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay. Minnesota M323 a Municipal Cf6ces
Telephone 473.7357
shuck Van Eeckhout
120 South Brown Road
Long Lake,
Minnesota 55356
Control No. 479
Variance
Conditional Use Permit
XX Subdivision, Preliminary
Date of Notice 5-22-79
NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION RE: 1025 North Brown Road
Date of Meeting May 21, 1979
Votes: For Against
Planning Commission recommends the following:
Approval: As submitted
Approval: Subject to conditions noted
Approval: Additional information required before Council meeting
Denial: For reasons noted
Tabled: Pending receipt of additional information from applicant
Tabled: Pending review by others, or further Planning Commission
X study
No action required
NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS To proceed with your subdivision application
the following must be furnished: 1) new plan reflecting corre,-Lions
sited at the meeting, 2)__Soils office to flag the wetland, 3) septic
test results, and 4) topographic map of area. Please call me at
,our earliest convenience.
11 Applicant's n,^xt scheduled meeting is confirmed as:
Planning Commission
Council
Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of
ae,litional information. Deadline for the _ June 11, 1979 _
meeting is ___ May f 1979 or _ tune 13_ 1979 _
for the June 25,_1979 _ meeting.
In all cases, the application must be continued with the submittal of
requested information within _ six months
or the City will consider the application as formally withdrawn.
If the applicant has trouble obtaining additional information, please
contact the Zoning Administrator.
If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission Minutes
they are available from the Building and Zoning Secretary ipon review
and approval by the Planning Commission.
PTANNING COMMISSION MEETING
June 1, 1979
n'
Planning Commission directed staff to define for applicant the
accepted method of determining the 200' width at building site.
Mr. Van Eeckhout was advised to make the following changes in
the sketch plan:
1. Realign lot lines to satisfy the 200' width at building
site.
2. Wetlands are to be combined with adjacent lots.
Staff note, June 1, 1979
Method for determining lot width at building site.
1.
Line is
to be drawn
through front
line
or house.
2.
Lot on a
Cul de sac
`
1r.rt
w-,w_
3. Lot on street
U
The new plans meet the requirement set forth at our last meeting.
The applicant must supply the following to proceed with his
preliminary application:
1. List 4 property owners within 300'.
2. Topographic map of plat area.
3. Required septic testing for each of the seven lots.
4. Certificate of survey.
5. Report from Hennepin Soil Office.
P� �►.,,� / 1, i t 7 f
'71 EL�* Al�
MINUTLS OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 11, 1979
PAGE 8
Hannah moved to recommend approval of the front
rnd side setback variances due to the restraint
of the property, better safety factor of new access
and neighbors approval conditioned upon:
1. New permit required from Hennepin County
Highway Department.
2. Old access to be closed off when new garage
is completed.
3. New garage must maintain the setbacks of the
original garage.
Motion seconded by Adams. Vote: Ayes (5),
Nays (1). Frahm was opposed to adding any
additional hardcover to the property.
Mr. Van Eeckhout was present. Planning Commission
was satisfied with the revised plan and gave
conceptual approval. Upon receipt of the septic
testing a Public Information Meeting will be
scheduled.
Mr. Klitzke and his builder were present. There
was discussion regarding whether or not the two
lots have 2-acres dry buildable, Applicant was
instructed to meet with staff to verify the dry
acreage. Staff will pull the septic testing for
Lot 5. Applicant will have testing done on Lot 4.
A Public Information Meeting is scheduled for
June 25, 1979.
Hannah moved to approve the Minutes as submitted.
Motion seconded by Adams. Vote: Ayes (6), Nays (0).
Motion passed unanimously.
Cfib,RI,ES COAKLEY
2166 Shadywood Road
VAR LANCE
Cant (#483)
`CHUCK VAN EECKHOUT
1025 North Brown Road
SUBDIVISION
Work Session
(#479)
LOREN KLITZKE
555/575 Oxford Road
SUBDIVISION
Sketch Plan Review
(#482)
APPROVAL OF MINLTTES
May 21, 1979
Meeting adjourned 12:05 A.M. ADJOURNMENT
PROPOSED SUBDIVISIO►' FOR
VAN EECKHOUT BUILDING COxPORATION
CITY OF ORONO
June 13, 1979
by Patrick N. Kennedy
Soil lines were not put on the plot because no contour lines
are given. The predominate soil on the site as taken from the
Hennepin Soil Survey is indicated as Hayden clay loam and may be
used for preliminary evaluation of the site potential. An on -
site determination of the suitability of the soil in the desig-
nated area of the Proposed drainfield on each lot must be the
final determinate.
The first item of concern to all parties involved :s the loca-
tion of the potential waste treatment sites on the lot. Poten-
tial waste treatment sites and house location should be desig-
nated before any actual on -site testing is done. The indiscrim-
inant placement of borings and percolation tests should be avoided.
Likely areas that should be considered for placement of waste
treatment systems include the crests of knolls and hills as well
as slightly sloping portions of hills. Landscape locations which
should be avoided are depressions and drainage swales that collect
runoff from the surrounding area.
The proposed house site should be stakes; and potential waste treat-
ment sites should be evaluated with the natural topography in
mind to provide gravity flow to the system if possible. The tests
required to determine site suitability should be conducted on the
first choice area of the proposed system. If test results are
negative additional potential areas that have been indicated :na�
he investigated. After soil testing is completed the site for the
waste treatment system should be conspicuously staked. This area
should be protected from au disturbance during other construction
act ivities.
Percolation tests and soil borings are conducted to determine site
suitabilit}-, system size and system type. The following informa-
tion needs to be obtained from the tests and borings.
All soil borings and percolation tests should be conducted within
the area of the proposed tia5te treatment system. Percolation tests
should be conducted at the proposed depth of the bottom o the
.-epage trenches. These tests should not be conducted in the
►exture. This will insure that the percolation tests are conducted
at the depth of the seepage trenches. At least 3 percolation tests
should be conducted following the standards for percolation tests
in WPC-40 the standards adopted by the Minnesota Pollution Control
AgencN-. Soil borings provide information on the soil texture and
deptl. to a watertable to be used in determining system size and
type.
The borings should be conducted to a depth of at least 4 feet
greater than the bottom of the seepage trenches.
Soil texture which is an expression of the inter -relationship
between the three grouping., of particle size: Sand, silt an,l clay;
should he identified for each 1 foot depth.
-2-
Depth to the watertable may be determined eit:ter by direct meas-
urement 24 hours after the boring is made or by measuring the
depth to soil mottling.
The first method will determine if at the time the borings are
conducted the soil is saturated. Often during wet seasons there
are perched watertables present. These watertables do not re-
flect regional aquifers but rather areas of saturated soil.
These seasonal watertables interfer with the functioning of the
standard subsurface trench systems. When the trenches are in-
stalled in the saturated soil zone, effluent entering the system
during wet periods cannot move away resulting in the effluent
surfacing or backing into the house. D- to soil mottling
indicates the location and presence of seasonal watertable.
Mottled soil consists of spots of contrasting color, mostly gray
and red. Unmottled well -drained soil is often brcwn. The diff-
erence between thr two is due to the periodic saturation. Where
the mottled soil occurs it can be assumed that during certain
wet periods the soil is saturated. The depth to mottling there-
fore tells what depth the soil treatment trenches should be
placed to maintain the ,ninimum 3 to 4 foot separatiLun between
trench bottoms and watertables recommended in the PCA Standards.
rom this information the proper to ion, sire and design of
your home sewage tre ment system ca., be determined.
POTENTIAL 01: SOILS rOR ON -SITE WASTE TREATMENT
Hayden soils which predominate may be suitable for the installation
of a conventional subsurface trench system. However, a shallow
subsurface trench system installed with the trenches no deeper than
12 inches will provide a greater probability for the system to
function properly. The shallow trench system utilizes the more
permeable portions of the soil profile. Size of the system
-hould probably be based on having 2.2 square feet of soil treat -
it area at the bottom of the trenches per gallon of waste per
uay as determined above.
The system must be located in an area of soils suitable for the
proposed soil treatment system as det rmined by an on -site eval-
uation consisting of soil borings and percolation tests. The
area which is designated as the waste treatment site must be
left undisturbed during all other construction activities.
Soil treatment systems are designed assuming that the system
will be installed in the natural undisturbed soil. The area
should not be graded and heavy construction equipment prevented
from ari%ing over the area. This will reduce the )otential for
compaction• of the soil which will reduce its potential for the
treatment of septic tank effluent.
-J-
The area designated for the soil treatment system must consist
of a large enough a -ea of a suitable soil to accomodate the entire
system.
The minimum setback and sizing requirements proposed in IVPC-40
should be observed.
Since most of the soils found in this area have a high clay con-
tent in the subsoil with accompanying slow permeability all resi-
dences constructed should be provided with foundation drains.
---------) llayden clay loam - 2 to 6 percent slope, eroded:
The map symbol for this soil is HcB2 and the map color is medium
green. ]'his is a gently sloping soil occupying irregularly shaped
areas on knolls and hillsides. Because this soil is eroded the
surface layer is clay loam. The rolling slopes offer attractive
building sites. The soil is well -drained and therefore never sat-
urated. Sidehill seepage is not uncommon however, are nd basement
walls during rainy seasons or spring thaws. Soil strength is ade-
quate for residential development. Shrink -swell (volume change)
is moderate with changes in moisture content. The soil is moder-
ately permeable. Erosion is a hazard when the land is graded and
left exposed for extended periods.
Y. _ t 81 G to
1 /• tsC1 ` -- .--- Uoins sA•a/3�1
Gc t __� _
to Gc r .LrC r �p LtC HaD n7 --=+ H.
Arh DlA H'--_ � HD8 1 i
Gc KYB ' r . Fd -\ \ •\Gc ;a HbF3
He k Du Hb { • ; Gc
Hc81 Ltd Ci82'r P /e '-d•�� . HDO -mC m f MCC/ I
•LtB G . Pa (fie C.,. HcC1•
h{ Lr 1 It
LtEl W
�,. Qt ,a i
)) , A Gc � \ Hr D2 a _
rvrvr ` Gc. r
"I DI LrB r y
�•� r• y 0. tr82.
I` Co � .! s a of HbC- 0 nF
HcO1 QS HCC2
h Gc ` t Ma HbD
+, U8 ti HiC2•';'p�. • lr ,
Gc Co r H He Nc` lbram? `\ ��Lc by
_ U S b
A.U/ Me
I)h No
Ha Gc _ o
Y r
HCC2 �
Ha Mt SwA C 'WA
Lang Lake
,. 4w Gc- , Fd
jGc
i
M.
me
\ •.
r SwB
{ SwA SwA - � 3 �- Gc HIE _
35
a Gc F
G Hr 8, . /
;,�•� Mt ' 2 - r HIDE G LA �ikD2 Hf� NDE
r ,..fk8.a �• H Ma H
Lt8 - r
to +. • Pa
G 3wA
D Ha SwA LtB r' e ,S Ha McC1 bE P Pa Y
q d Pa "r ♦ '' - Ert EnE
HbD
c
R Gc Gc Bo pa o
i •� Y t • N McC o
• r -
1 i , 0 MDG Ld
He Pa
UB Sw8 Gc Lr8 I Gc H Gc EnE
�. HMa .114 a
CC \
, la
4 M Mt Lr8 ► A, EnC
/i He Co Lr- Ma BO EnC
q
O
!� lt9 ! H• rC 40 c M•rc
n
i US
L►8 Hb8i H ,SFT Pm Ma n
r v � ATM W{•rt H5
.01 1 Mb 1
1 r N• M. - LrC b Ma
} r Lt Co Ha KYC MpF
'4. KYB Mt C, Li `� r Mb Ma El
� KYHa Lr8 lsC2 .. � B �^ Lr8'ma
�
•, �. tD t � f
H• � � tiOE
i Na EnE s
MC sCZ
r Lr8 r• HbD 1r 3 r KMC Asrt[
Pa 2 r1 Va V T KYC Mb[ v w
tb � •
Vto m 1 ' KYC rr ! Pm
H LrC ` LrC (MDB + KYC
KkC
Lt'
• } l u �, o C KYC ^ KYC KY
YC Hb �, KYE 0 H• W /
MbC • \ .a u M• Gc KYC
r `� KAU L bDQ tic KY Ma rl Eno
�•
•` NY
MbC 0 Mb� KY , HD Fd 1c
y
'` M• M IM, 7unuyvr KYE ,+p�
(' Ma Ma �f 1 La En •
U00" shear 51
S 112 SEC. '2T, T.118, R.- 23
o�
i {A r71« A.vr�!!.r I•Id Ja7.dM/ j -a r..•.
•�t .C« e ! I r... wr .•�!. 1. rJ.Ar !
i
J 17rf
� ■nl
'-7 'j;I ' •A rGr
ate'
L•7 ; 1 �,
0
r
i
a7ea.,.• J I�rM1
r.•a.
e
A K Ems\
J AKL
ar
N . N
1
P 0 r o --Pa
Us
�r .7f 1 � aM rr r..J •�
..mow
w SEC. 34 ha 11 2)