The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutProject PacketOkONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2003 FIRE SERVICE REPORT None. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT *3. #03-2936 Bruce Meese & Maureen Murphy, 3135 Casco Circle-Variance- Resolution No. 5058 Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5058 granting a hardcover variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-282 and 78-1288(B) to allow an existing lakeside deck to remain in the O -75' setback zone. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 4. #03-2948 WJM Properties, LLC, 2605 West Wayzata Boulevard-Conditional Use Permit Extension-Resolution No. 5059 Gaffron stated the item was removed from Consent Agenda to clarify wording in the resolution. He stated that the applicants were asking for a 16-month extension of the CUP because they had issues to work through with the Watershed District. Until all matters with the Watershed District are finalized, they cannot proceed '\\ith the required conditions of Resolution No. 4845, which include a screening fence, berms, and trees at the north end of the parking lot. The applicant expects resolution with the MCWD by the en<l of 2004. Gaffron stated that the applicant's attorney, Peter Johnson, wanted to be sure that the required temporary screening described in items 3 and 4 of Findings in the Resolution only apply to the 15 parking stalls on the northeast end of the parking lot. Murphy suggested that since the building would not progress for the next 16 m o nths, the City could ask the applicant to put a coat of paint on the face of the building. ~fayor Peterson, White, and Sansevere agreed that would be appropriate. Mayor Peterson stated they should request the applicant paint the front of the building in good faith. Mayor Peterson moved, and White seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5059 approving a 16-month extension of the effective period of Resolutions No. 4585 and · No. 4993 to December 31, 2004, due to delays as noted in the applicant's letter of request which is part of the public record of Application #03-2948 and hereby approves an amendment to the Industrial Site Plan Approval granted via Resolution 2 FIRE SERVICE REPORT MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 22, 2003 7:00 o'clock p.m. Murphy introduced Excelsior Fire Chief Mark DuCharme and Long Lake Assh7a.nt Fire Chief Tony Roe, noting that the purchase of equipment for the Navarre Firefighters had already been approved this evening . DuCharme reported that the Navarre Fire Station construction project was moving along as · expected, the plans for operation were being put in place, and that the first firefighter training class of 4-5 students was in session. Since the FFl training class is set up in modules, DuCharme explained that additional trainees can be brought in throughout the training process . H e stated that a second training session would begin after January 1 si, 2004, to secure 15 trained firefighters prior to the fire station's opening . While the purchase of the personal protection equ ipment is just one of the necessary elements for the station , DuCharme noted that other apparatus and equipment will be required in upcoming months. He stated that , thanks to the efforts of Tony Roe , the relationship with the Long Lake Fire Department has never been better. Sansevere pointed out that once the police budget is settled, the Long Lake Fire Sernce budget will be moving forward. He mentioned that both the Long Lake Floral and Las Brisas restaurant are willing to assist with fundraisers . Murphy commented that it is an h istoric day to have both the Excelsior and Long Lake Fire Chiefs together working with Orono. He noted that he had complete faith in DuCharme ' s Excelsior Fire Service and thanked both representatives for being here this evening. Chief DuCharme recognized Moorse for his tireless effort as well. PlJBLIC COMMENTS There were none. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT *5. #03-2905 HEIDI B. NAGEL, 995 WILDHURST TRAIL, V_..\RIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 5046 Murphy moved, White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5046, a Resolution granting an average setback variance to allow enclosure of a portion of the existing deck as living space and extension of roof to cover a portion of the front porch, subject to the additional removals of 84 s.f. of hardcover to be consistent with the 1995 approval for the property located at 995 Wildhurst Trail. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. 6. #03-2936 BRUCE MEESE AND MAl'REEN MURPHY, 3135 CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCE Waataja explained that the applicants have requested a hardcover variance in the 0-75' setback zone to allow 6% of hardcover where 0% is allowed and 14% currently exists. The P _anning Page 3 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 22, 2003 7:00 o'clock p.m. (6. #03-2936 BRUCE MEESE AND MAUREEN MURPHY, 3135 CASCO CIRCLE, Continued) Commission voted 4-1, consistent with staffs recommendation, for denial of the hardcover request in exchange for a 32 s.f. landing allowed by code and an additional 20 s.f. allowance for the lock box. Based on City Council direction, Waataja noted that the applicants have consulted with an engineering firm, BKBM, whose comments were somewhat inconclusive and included in the packet, as well as, City Engineer Kellogg's response. Sansevere asked the applicants if they had pursued additional testing. Ms. Murphy explained that, it seemed to her, that no one wished to make a ruling on this matter and lay their reputation on the line just in case they were incorrect and the retaining wall structure deteriorates. While she admitted that they could continue to pursue testing and spending money to jump through the 'hoops', she believed they were in an awkward position, since no one would like to accept liability for their ruling. She indicated that they were hardpressed to do more, and spend more, at this juncture if everyone is hesitant to rule on the wall and deck system. Murphy concurred, stating that he gleaned the same perspective from the letter that no one wants to take any blame on any ruling they might make if they are wrong; therefore, they are hesitant to say much at all. Sansevere stated that he would prefer to see the decking remain as opposed to the concrete wall across the front of the property. He asked if the City would need a stronger basis to approve the application or whether this would be precedent setting. Gaffron maintained that total rebuilds give the City an opportunity to bring properties into compliance, and pointed out that the concrete wall could be obscured with landscaping and other plantings. Ms. Murphy indicated that their original intent was to remodel the home; however, after conversations with City staff it became clear that our project would be reviewed as a rebuild and have strived to meet all of the City's requirements, one of which may force them to remove a 100 year old oak tree on the site. As it was noted by BKBM the wall was cracked in spots, Sansevere indicated that he was not convinced the decking wasn't providing a certain degree of stability to the slope and retaining wall. While he had not seen the site himself, Kellogg had three concerns with regard to the letter submitted by BKBM. First, the letter stated that since the wall had recently been completely covered by rough-sawn fencing, BKBM admitted that a complete review was impossible; second, BKBM acknowledged that originally the retaining wall was not designed to require the supplemental bracing provided by the deck; and third, no physical testing was performed. Ms. Murphy offered to take Mr. Kellogg to the site to review the deck and wall system for him in an effort to obtain an opinion of some kind. She maintained that the physical testing would be difficult, since the wood is screwed/anchored right to the retaining wall and removal of the wood alone might adversely impact the wall altogether. Page 4 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 22, 2003 7:00 o'clock p.m. (6. #03-2936 BRUCE MEESE AND MAUREEN MURPHY, 3135 CASCO CIRCLE, Continued) Gaffron reiterated that the applicants could be allowed a 32 s.f. landing and an additional 20 s.f. for a lock box in lieu of the deck. If it were determined that some kind of structural support were necessary to ensure the integrity of the wall system, Moorse questioned what type of support might be sufficient. Kellogg suggested that the concrete itself could be reinforced or tiebacks could be used; however, not seeing it for himself he was hesitant to make that recommendation. Since in the absence of any definitive engineering expertise to say one way or another and since it seems as if the combined wall and decking system is supporting this retaining wall structure, Murphy stated that he would not be willing to risk mandating the removal of the decking only to see the wall crumble below. Ms. Murphy pointed out that during their last visit before Council she had suggested the City Engineer visit the site and make a recommendation; however, was told by City Attorney Barrett that the City Engineer should not make a ruling on this either, to ensure the City is not liable for the ruling. Murphy maintained that the applicants had done what the City Council had asked them to do, attempt to obtain a ruling from a reputable engineering firm. Although the results were inconclusive, Murphy indicated that he was not willing to risk tearing out the decking screwed to the retaining wall if the wall were jeopardized in the process. He felt this alone constituted adequate hardship. White concurred. Sansevere asked Kellogg whether he believed other testing or investigation was warranted. Kellogg stated that other testing techniques could potentially be done, though some are rather destructive, others are not. He felt that it was difficult to determine what could further be done not having seen the system himself. Murphy moved, White seconded, to grant a hardcover variance in the 0-75' setback zone to allow 6% hardcover consisting of an existing lakeside deck, where 0% is typically allowed, subject to the removal of the deck skirting, planting of an appropriate vegetative screen, and the condition that if the deck should deteriorate to such a degree that it must be rebuilt it cannot be replaced on the property at 3135 Casco Circle. Sansevere asked Kellogg if he believed the physical testing required would require the deck to be pulled off in the first place to test. Page 5 of16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 22, 2003 7:00 o'clock p.m. (6. #03-2936 BRUCE MEESE AND MAUREEN MURPHY, 3135 CASCO cmCLE, Continued) Kellogg stated that, typically, the physical testing does require some elaborate tests which would require the removal of the anchored decking itself. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. 7. #03-2937 ROB MORLOCK, 980 NORTH SHORE DRIVE WEST -PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISIO:N -RESOLUTION NO. 5047 Murphy mowd, White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5047, a Resolution granting Preliminary Plat approval for a 2-acre subdivision to be known as Englund Third Addition located at 980 North Shore Drive. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *8. #03-2938 SANDRA S. LARSON, 540 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD SOUTH - VARIANCES -RESOLUTION NO. 5048 Murphy moved, White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5048, a Resolution approving the side yard and street setback variances in order to construct a 10'X28' addition to the north side of the property located at 540 Orono Orchard Road South. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *9. #03-2939 PETE AND MAXINE THORKELSON, 440 BIG ISLAND -CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -RESOLUTION NO. 5049 Murphy moved, White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5049, a Resolution granting a Conditional Vse Permit in order to allow a private sewer line in the street right-of-way to serve their non-contiguous lot located at 440 Big Island. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *10. #03-2940 SCOTT AND LISSA HARVEY, 1199 ELIDVOOD A VENUE -VARIANCES -RESOLUTION NO. 5050 Murphy moved, White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5050, a Resolution granting a variance for hardcover in the 75-250' setback zone of 38.6% where 25% is normally allowed, approval of the 0-75' zone hardcover variance to allow 15 s.f. of deck to encroach into the 0- 75' zone, and approval of the lake setback variance to allow the south west corner of the deck to continue to encroach 3' into the 75' setback in order to reconstruct a deck at 1199 Elmwood Avenue. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *11. #03-2941 PAUL CADY, 465 TURNHAM ROAD -CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTIO:N NO. 5051 Murphy moved, White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5051, a Resolution granting a Conditional Vse Permit to construct a pool on a 'through' lot for 465 Turnham Road. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. Page 6 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 25, 2003 7:00 o'clock p.m. *8. #03-2927 JAMES AND LINDA MARTINSON -1435 PARK DRIVE -VARIAN CE - RESOLUTION NO. 5028 Murphy moved, White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5028, a Resolution granting lot area and lot width variances to construct a 3,608 s.f. single family home on the .75 acre with defined lot width of 95' at the lake and 100' at the 75' setback. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *9. #03-2930 STREETER AND ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF OF RICHARD AND DELORES LITTLE, 2775 SHADYWOOD ROAD -VARIANCES -RESOLUTION NO. 5029 Murphy moved, White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5029, a Resolution granting hardcover variances in order to replace driveway hardcover with a 22' X 25' garage addition for the property located at 2775 Shadywood Road. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *10. #03-2931 TIMOTHY AND KRISTI OSTERBERG, 1045 LOMA LINDA A VENUE - VARIANCES -RESOLUTION NO. 5030 Murphy moved, White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5030, a Resolution granting a front yard setback variance of 28' where 35' is required to replace an existing attached garage for 1045 Loma Linda Avenue. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *11. #03-2932 MICHAEL HAYES OF MICHAEL HAYES HOMES ON BEHALF OF ALBERT TRAPENESE, 3220 BOHN'S POINT LAND -VARIANCES -RESOLUTION NO. 5031 Murphy moved, Wb,ite seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5031, a Resolution granting a Conditional Use Permit to place a detached accessory structure on a through lot, and also a variance in order to place that detached accessory structure 20' from a street side lot line where a 35' setback is required. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *12. #03-2933 GARY NECE ON BEHALF OF ROBERT AND BRENDA MACDONALD, 2480 OLD BEACH ROAD -CONDITIONAL USE PER1'11TS -VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 5032 Murphy moved, White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5032, a Resolution granting a Conditional Use Permit to allow plumbing in an accessory building for a toilet room in the new detached garage/entertainment room and a non-rental guest apartment above the existing garage. Approval of a variance to allow a separate water meter and approval of a hardcover variance for the 75'-250' zone subsequent to hardcover removals which amount to the area of hardcover being added for the property located at 2480 Old Beach Road. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. 13. #03-2936 BRUCE MEESE AND MAUREEN MURPHY, 3135 CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCES -RESOLUTION NO. 5033 Waataja explained that the applicants request the following variances to construct a new home: 1. Lot area variance to allow reconstruction of a home on a .49 acre lot when .5 acres is required. Page 9 of 14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,August25,2003 7:00 o'clock p.m . (13. #03-2936 BRUCE :MEESE AND MAUREEN MURPHY, 3135 CASCO CIRCLE, Continued) 2. Lot width variance to allow reconstruction of a home where the width at the shoreline and 75' setback is 60 ' when 100' is normally required. 3. Hardcover variance to allow 6% hardcover in the 0-75' zone when 0% is allowed and to allow 37 % hardcover in the 250-500' zone when 30% is allowed. The Planning Commission recommended on a 4-1 vote approval consistent with staffs recommendation for: 1. Approval of the lot area variance to allow reconstruction of a home. 2. Approval of the lot width variance to allow reconstruction of a home. 3. Denial of the hardcover variance to allow 6% hardcover in the 0-75 foot zone when 0% is required to be consistent with what has been approved on rebuild lots. 4. Approval of the hardcover variance to allow 37% hardcover in the 250-500' zone when 30% is required due to the minimal area allotted in this zone and sight visibility triangles which result in a larger driveway. Ha'\\n cast the dissenting vote allowing the deck to remain in the 0-75' zone. Bruce Meese stated that they were hesitant to remove the deck, as it was attached to the existing concrete retaining wall, and they would be concerned it might adversely impact the support pro\ided by the wall. Ms. yfurphy stated that Otten Brothers had indicated that if the deck is removed they would need to add additional stone rip rap to stabilize the steep slope. While she explained that it is their desire to comply, she did not feel removing hardcover to be replaced with new hardcover was a good solution. White asked why the deck and wall system wasn't seen as a hardship, since it holds up the steep slope. Gaffron stated that, in staffs perspective, we do not know whether removing the deck from the wall system will negatively impact the stability of the slope. He recognized that the neighbor also has the same concrete wall system retaining their slope. Ms. yfurphy stated that they performed recent repairs to the deck and covered the ugly concrete wall with cedar in order to disguise it naturally. Waataja stated that the applicants would be allowed steps up the hill and a landing. Sansevere questioned if having the applicant remove the decking along the concrete wall was a better solution , thus leaving the ugly exposed concrete instead . White noted that the applicant had no flat space at the shoreline to put anything. Gaffron acknowledged that the positive impact is that the deck could be helping hold up the slope, negatively, the hardcover is not allowed by code . He also questioned if it would be a worse visual Page 10 of 14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 25, 2003 7:00 o'clock p.m. (13. #03-2936 BRUCE MEESE AND MAUREEN MURPHY, 3135 CASCO CIRCLE, Continued) impact to remove the decking and expose the concrete wall than it would be to allow the natural cedar to remain. White felt this was a visual hardship if nothing else and asked what constituted the hardcover. Gaffron stated that the deck floor and superstructures would constitute the hardcover and it is unclear whether they are holding anything up. Murphy agreed that, aesthetically, the applicants would be better off covering up the concrete wall. Ms. Murphy agreed, stating that they tried to lose it in a natural state by covering it with the cedar. Sansevere asked Barrett if there were any hardship they could apply to this variance request. Barrett stated that the City cannot grant a variance based solely on aesthetics; however, if they determine the decking to be part of the superstructure it would be a necessary part of the retaining wall. Sansevere moved, \Vhite seconded, to table the hardcover variance request of Application #03-2936, Bruce Meese and Maureen Murphy, 3135 Casco Circle in order to obtain an engineer's opinion regarding the retaining wall and decking system. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays O. Moorse pointed out that the applicants should obtain an independent engineer's report, so that the City is not liable if something happens. Sansevere moved, \"\-llite seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5033, a Resolution approving the lot are~ lot width variances, and hardcover variances to allow 37% hardcover in the 250-500' zone when 30% is required due to the minimal area allotted in this zone and sight visibility triangles which result in a larger driveway to allow reconstruction of a home at 3135 Casco Circle. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *14. #02-2789/02-2840 DAHLSTROM DEVELOP:MENT, LLC, "2550" \VAYZATA BOULEY ARD -FOR"\IAL APOPROV AL OF PRIVATE ROAD NA.t"\IES FOR "STONEBA Y" Murphy moved, White seconded, to approve the names for private roads '"ithin the plat of Stonebay as presented in the staff memo dated August 21, 2003. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. J\IA YOR/CITY COlJ~CIL REPORT 23a. RECOGNIZING ORGANIZERS OF CASCO POINT 1'"1:IGHBORHOOD NIGHT OUT EVENT-RESOLUTION NO. 5034 White read a Resolution thanking Mary Tucker and Laura Dotzenroth for organizing the Casco Point Neighborhood Night Out event held Tuesday, August 5, 2003. The resolution congratulated Page 11 of 14 MlNUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 18, 2003 6:00 o'clock p.m. (#13) #03-2936 BRUCE MEESE Ai'-'D MAUREEN MURPHY, 3135 CASCO CIRCLE, VARIAN CE, 8:23 -8:59 P.M. Bruce Meese and Maureen Murphy, the Applicants, and Carrigan Curtis from Stonehouse Designs, were present. Waataja reported that the applicants request the following variances to construct a new home: 1. Lot area variance to allow reconstruction of a home on a .49 acre lot when .5 acres is required. 2. Lot width variance to allow reconstruction of a home where the width at the shoreline and 75' setback is 60' when 100' is normally required. 3. Hardcover variance to allow 6% hardcover in the 0-75' zone when 0% is allowed and to allow 37% hardcover in the 250-500' zone when 30% is allowed Originally, Waataja stated that the applicants applied for a variance to remodel the existing home and allow an existing, non-conforming 8' setback in the southwestern comer of the home to remain to try and save an existing large maple tree. After reviewing the plans and conversations with the architect it became apparent that the majority of the existing home was to be demolished to accommodate the renovations, and if the true intention was to save the tree the home should be shifted north. Because of this staff directed the applicant that the project would be reviewed as a rebuild and that the home should be shifted to meet the 10' setback requirement. The applicant agreed to this and submitted new plans applying for a lot area and lot width variance. Waataja explained that upon further examination of the plans it was discovered that the new home would meet the hardcover requirements in the 75-250' zone but the 0-75'and 250-500' zones, as they currently exist, are over on hardcover. Due to the rebuild, the whole lot is reviewed for hardcover compliance and has required the applicant to now apply for hardcover variances. Because the house is being rebuilt and not renovated a lot area and lot width variance must be reviewed as a formality. The lot is approximately 21,392 s.f. or .49 acres in area, just short of the 22,000 s.f (.50 acre) requirement. The property measures 60' in width at the shoreline as well as at the 7 5' setback line, 40' short of the 100' width requirement. This is generally the characteristics of lots in this neighborhood. W aataj a explained that the applicants bought the property this past winter. The new plans meet the hardcover requirements for the 75-250' zone. Because the house is being rebuilt the entire lot is reviewed for hardcover compliance. Both the 0-75' and 250-500' zones are non-compliant as they currently exist. · In the 0-75 'zone there is approximately 14% of hardcover. This includes a circular concrete patio, fire-pit, stairway, boulder retaining walls, and deck. The applicants have agreed to remove the circular concrete patio and fire-pit which results in 355 s.f. or 7.4% PAGE 23 of30 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,August 18,2003 6:00 o'clock p.m. (#13 #03-2936 BRUCE MEESE AND MAUREEN MURPHY, Continued) of the hardcover in the zone. There also are retaining walls consisting of 53 s.f. or 1.2% hardcover in the zone. The applicants have not mentioned removing these and the slope leading to the lake is steep and highly vegetated. Thus, the walls are probably being used to control drainage and protect the deck. There is also a 226.26 s.f. lakeside deck which results in 5.0% of the hardcover. The applicants did minor repairs to the deck and would like to keep it. Lastly, the stairway is an allowed use on the 0-75' zone and was not counted in the 14% hardcover figure and can remain. To be consistent in reviewing rebuilds, Waataja stated that staff would recommend that the lakeside deck be removed. This would limit the hardcover in the 0-75' zone to retaining walls (53 s.f.) and the allowed stairway. If the deck were removed, hardcover in the 0-75' zone would be 53 s.f. or 1.2% when 0% is normally required. In the 250-500' zone there is approximately 2,194.5 s.f. or 34.8% hardcover. This includes the existing garage which has non-conforming setbacks, a concrete patio, and a conservative driveway. The applicants would like to tear down the existing garage and rebuild a three car garage meeting setback requirements. The concrete patio would be removed. The driveway would remain conservative and include a tum-around for safety purposes. The proposed hardcover, taking into account the new garage and revised driveway, would bring the hardcover to 2,332.5 s.f. or 37%. Staff has found that the new garage and revised driveway are reasonable and that attempts have been made to meet Zoning Ordinance requirements. Waataja reported that staff recommends: 1. Approval of the lot area variance to allow reconstruction of a home. 2. Approval of the lot width variance to allow reconstruction of a home. 3. Denial of the hardcover variance to allow 6% hardcover in the 0-75 foot zone when 0% is required to be consistent with what has been approved on rebuild lots. 4. Approval of the hardcover variance to allow 37% hardcover in the 250-500' zone when 30% is required due to the minimal area allotted in this zone and sight visibility triangles which result in a larger driveway. Ms. Curtis pointed out that, while the lakeside deck seems to be the issue, the wooden slats of the deck structure do serve a function of holding up the steep slope. Murphy stated that they covered up the original concrete wall with wood planks in an effort to improve it aesthetically. Chair Smith asked if the concrete wall acted as a retaining wall. Waataja stated that the concrete wall does appear to be holding up the grade, although the deck portion of the retaining wall does not appear to serve the same function. PAGE24of30 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 18, 2003 6:00 o'clock p.m. (#13 #03-2936 BRUCE MEESE AND MAUREEN MURPHY, Continued) Meese stated that the deck helps to alleviate the steepness of the stairway. Chair Smith noted that the Commission has allowed steps where the grade has been exceptionally steep; however, she questioned whether they have allowed decks for safety purposes in rebuild situations. Gaffron stated that, in most cases, rebuilds have dictated removal of decks in lieu of a landing on the steps. Fritzler maintained that the deck, as is, could not stay. Hawn pointed out that the yard consists of a very compromised slope. She questioned whether the removal of the deck which helps to support the wall would upset or do more damage to the site than would be allowing it to remain. She was unsure if the very removal of the deck would jeopardize the very shoreline they are striving to preserve. Rahn believed the deck portion of the retaining wall was not necessary for the wall system to remain, although he would make an allowance for a landing with excess space to house a lockbox. He felt consistency dictated the decks removal. Zugschwert agreed with Hawn that there is a need to ensure the integrity of the wall system. While she noted the Commission was divided on the deck, Chair Smith added that the Commission could support the lot width and area variance requests. Hawn stated that she had trouble supporting the need for a three car garage, when a two car garage would suffice, and hardcover was in question. Murphy stated that, while she felt they were making numerous concessions, she also believed the three car garage would be good for resale and storage. She maintained that the three car garage would not impact any views and would help them to save some of the trees on the site. Curtis pointed out that the top part of the building pad was extremely small and that no matter what size the garage they would be over on hardcover there. Rahn asked if the Commission could accept the applicants borrowing from the 75-250' zone where little has been used in order to beef up the 250-500' zones. PAGE25 of30 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,August18,2003 6:00 o'clock p.m. (#13 #03-2936 BRUCE MEESE AND MAUREEN MURPHY, Continued) By borrowing the square footage of one zone and moving it to another, Waataja pointed out that the applicants would be at 26.5% hardcover, in excess of merely 140 s.f., which could likely be removed elsewhere. Gaffron pointed out that the deck is in the 250-500' zone. Although he was hesitant, he suggested the garage could be moved closer to the road, thus reducing the length of the driveway, it would be harder to screen. Murphy pointed out that moving the garage back would cause the loss of numerous tall spruce trees, and since the road is so narrow, and her car had been hit parked along the road once, it would be better for the neighborhood to keep parking contained within their property. Gaffron stated that the hardship could be considered the small size of the zone at the top of the site. Chair Smith asked whether they might still consider an oversized two car ga.rage. Waataja stated that it steps back from 23.5' to 21.5' and has three separate deers. Hawn stated that she would accept the smallness of the zone, since she belieYed it would be better to have the parking away from the road in this situation. Gaffron reminded the Commission of the example of the Cable property, where the applicants chose a too narrow driveway for their three car garage in order to meet the 25% limit. Rahn suggested they consider some reductions in driveway cover, even though he agreed the zone was too small. Zugschwert stated that she was unwilling to force the applicants to remove their three car garage in order to achieve a 7% gain in the zone the Commission deems as a hardship. Chair Smith asked for an opinion on the deck in the 0-75' zone. Fritzler maintained they remove the deck and allow 52 s.f. for a landing and lockbox spot. Meese questioned what they would do if the deck was removed and they found they had to replace it, i.e. replacing one hardcover for another. PAGE26 of30 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 18, 2003 6:00 o'clock p.m. (#13 #03-2936 BRUCE MEESE AND MAUREEN MURPHY, Continued) Gaffron stated that if they found the retaining wall was in need ofreplacemen~ they would have to reapply to do so. He noted that nonconforming structures at the lakeshore is limited by code and new construction encourages removal. There were no public comments. Chair Smith moved, Rahn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #03- 2936, Bruce Meese and Maureen Murphy, 3135 Casco Circle, approving the lot area and lot width variances, denial of the hardcover variance to allow 6% hardcover in the 0-75' zone, and approval of the hardcover variance request to allow 37% hardcover in the 250-500' zone. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Hawn dissenting. Hawn stated that she would permit the deck on the 0-75' setback zone to remain to ensure the integrity of the slope. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING 8:00 P.M. (#14) #03-2937 BOB MORLOCK, 980 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, PRELDIINARY SUBDIVISION, 8:59 -9:18 P.M. Bob Morlock, the Applicant, and Brad Wells, of Coldwell Banker, were present. Waataja reported that the applicant requests preliminary plat approval for a 2-lot subdivision to be known as Englund Third Addition located at 980 North Shore Drive. The property is zoned RR-1B, One Family Rural Residential District which requires 2 acre minimum lot sizes. The property is a 4 acre parcel to be divided into 2, 2 acre lots. Waataja noted that the existing home on the property would be removed and that the property is not located within 1,000' of lakeshore and therefore not subject to hardcover requirements. Since all proposed setbacks are taken from proposed 40' x 40' house pads, it should be noted that the proposed lots have enough buildable area to accommodate a house much larger than the 40' x 40' pads. Waataja explained that the property abuts County Road 19; therefore, Hennepin County has jurisdiction over access and has reviewed the preliminary plat but failed to send correspondence to their recommendation to date. The applicant has indicated that the existing drive access will be utilized for Lot 2 and that a new drive access from Co. Rd. 19 will be established for Lot 1. The City Engineer has recommended a shared driYeway agreement to minimize curb cuts on Co. Rd. 19. While the issue of a private driYe or additional Co. Rd. 19 access should be discussed, Waataja stated that the Planning Department staff would recommend that the City follow the recommendations of the County on this issue. PAGE 27 of30 / .,,.. / / / A\lowd ~ t)yiVlW"'-'/ ~- ~ POINT OF BEGINNING -- NW CORNER OF LOT 41 .-)\ ~ \ (' c_ \_ J '( ,.\ I '-I '-/ ..._/ \ \ \ ... ~ 11 ') LIL__ \ ~ \ ~ O> ...... N -w · 1"' ~ O> N 0 ...... z \ 964-j- I --~· -:-963 ~ -i--BUILDI '[ SETBACK--! § LINE ~ I I .10 ~ 962-: 10 I r----.Jll!::J -1-- I 10 \_ -~-Q . 1b 0 ----~ ,...... ~ .. ~ ? " ~"' ~\-s"Ei'~ cJ:,'o ~ ~ \-1,:; r.r,,' " 0~ . '>6'_~ 4/./)o0 ~ ,r \.. MOST E'L '< CORNER --966.4-0f LOT 64 fO\P 3/4-"0PEN 965_ -- --· 963.7 r;,--,--, :) \ " C) \ i.1 ,-\ \ "\ "- ~ ~ ustMVSf ~--w~A1NIAI N 1/t7~• SEIB~[s, 11 51 ON t,0-rH I ;::C , 0 / 1 ,,~/ •/1,~1 N ,½I; 3: 0:/ ~~~ £;~/, VI /W/11/1;; 58:9 959.1 I ~ -..... ~ c;---------11 r, 954.7 L ~ \) -!~OPEN I \... .... :..---- -p NOR . -----ro e>t- ~(l)'lo\ld 951.6 I ....... . + p_~1n -J '1,1(1..\\ 7ill'U(2"0PEN f!i~ "\\OW ~ t;; 936.5 mf 931.1~ 9?9 ~ -~"'If!!'---------·-·- / ~ + ...... I") LEGEND --:::-- ~ OHE EMO DENOTES UT\LIT'< poLE DENOTES OVERHEAD ELECTRIC \J 0 • ota--tV ~ @ ~unov<A-. ~ ·152s,f. ~~Ln~~ A\lDw.eJ.. MAP DENOTES TELEPHONE BOX DENOTES sEi \RON MONUMENT DENOTES FOUND IRON MONUMEt DENOTES JUDICIAL LANDMARK DENOTES BOULDER RETAIN ING 'If DENOTES BLOCK RETAINING WAL DENOTES MAPLE TREE p.tv,~ (W/Dhfh' DY\ -fD ti DWIY11 Cov.N(/ ';, . ·. . dt/Jt,u~ A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25 SUBDIVISION 6 (b), SECTION 10.22 SUBDIVISION 2, AND SECTION 10.56 SUBDIVISION 16 (1) FILE NO. #03-2936 WHEREAS, Bruce. 'F .,Meese & Maureen E . Murphy (husband & wife), . (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 313 5 Casco Circle within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "~ity") and legally described as follows: Lot 41 , that part of Lot 64, that part of vacated Lake Shore A venue, and that part of the tract of land between said avenue and the shore of Lake Minnetonka, all described as beginning at the Northwest comer of Lot 41 , which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case Number 16333; thence South along the West line of Lot 41 and its extension, a distance of219 .07 feet , which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case Number 163 3 3 ; thence continuing South along said extension to the shore of Lake :r-:fi!'_fletonka; thence Easterly along said shore to its intersection ,.,,ii_:!': '.!:':' <:r:-1_1 th':'rly extension of the East line of Lot 41; thence North to the Northeast comer of Lot 41; thence Northeasterly to a point on the Northeasterly line of Lot 64 distant 30.0 feet Northwesterly from the most Easterly comer of Lot 64 , thence Northwesterly a long said Northwesterly line to it s inters e ction with a line drawn parall el with and 24 .00 feet Southeasterly, measured at right angles from the Northwesterly line of Lot 64 and its extension, which a point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case Number 16333; thence Southerly a distance of 51.35 feet , more or less , to the point of beginning; all in SPRING PARK, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said County . (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS , the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25 Subdivision 6 (b), Section 10 .22 Subdivision 2 , and Section I 0 .56 Subdivision 16 (1) to rebuild a home on the ex isting lot. .,-. Page 1 of 6 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #03-2936. 2. The property is located in the LR -1 C zoning district, which requires a minimum lot area of ½ acre and a minimum lot width of 100 feet. The applicants' property is .49 acres and has a width of 60 feet. 3. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on August 18, 2003 and recommended approval of the lot area, lot width and 250-500' zone hardcover variance based on the following findings: a. The property is .49 acres in size when .50 acres is required. b. The property has a lot width of 60 feet at the shoreline and 75' setback when 100' is required. c. Because the lot is being reviewed as a rebuild, the lot must conform to current Zoning Ordinance standards or a hardship shall be presented. d. Due to the configuration of the lot, minimal area exists in the 250-500' zone, hence a variance to allow excess hardcover for the proposed detached garage is not reasonable. e. Because of sight visibility problems on Casco Circle, a turnaround is necessary to safely exit the drive. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic Page 2 of 6 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 variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 10 .25 Subdivision 6 (b), Section 10.22 Subdivision 2 , and Section 10 .56 Subdivision 16 (1) to allow a house to be rebuilt on an existing lot , subject to the following conditions : 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2 . Approval for hardcover amounts in the 75-250 ' and 250-500 ' zones are based on the hardcover amounts listed in the planning report. 22.4% hardcover is allowed <!::.,,,.i:;.... __ _ in the 75-250 ' zone and 37% hardcover is allowed in the 250-500' zone. 3. The excessive hardcover in the 0-75 ' zone will be reviewed separately and isn't included in this resolution . A resolution addressing the decision on the hardcover ,-c._--- in the 0-75' zone will be drafted once a final decision has been made by the City Council. 4. Hardcover in the 75-250 ' zone shall be limited to 2,369 s.f. or 22.4% per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit A. Applicants are advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or change ~,,,,,,....._ __ the nature of existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. 5. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (August 25, 2004). ,_ t' .. Page 3 of 6 6. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 7. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms · of this resolution and on behalf of 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 25 th day of August, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) '· Page 4 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of , 2003 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor 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 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of ____ , 2003 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. Notary Public '' Page 5 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this __ day of ____ _ 2003by _________________________ _ STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Notary Public This instrument was acknowledged before me this __ day of -----2003by _________________________ _ Notary Public \. Page 6 of 6 Date Application Received: 7-23-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 7-23-03 60-Day Review Period Expires: 9-22-03 and extended to 11-21-03 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name: Janice Waatajaa}J Title: City Planner Administrator Approval: Date: October 9, 2003 Item No.: Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #03-2936, Bruce Meese & Maureen Murphy, 3135 Casco Circle, -Hardcover Variance Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: List of Exhibits LR -IC, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (½ acre min.) .49 acres (21,392 s.f.) 60 feet A -Resolution per City Council Direction B -Council Action Notice 9-23-03 Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variance to allow an existing lakeside deck to remain: I . Hardcover and lakeshore setback variance to allow an existing deck and retaining walls constituting 6% hardcover in the 0-75' zone to remain when 0% hardcover and no structure is normally allowed and 14% currently exists. This request was heard before the City Council on September 8 and September 22, 2003. The applicants were instructed to get an engineer's opinion on the interdependency of the wall on the deck. The engineer's opinion was inconclusive. The City Council, at their September 22, 2003 meeting, concluded that the deck should be allowed to remain in an effort to preserve the slope, since it is unknown whether the slope will fail if the deck were removed. The City Council instructed staff to draft a resolution approving the lakeside deck with the stipulation that if the deck or retaining wall at any time need to be replaced the deck cannot be rebuilt under any circumstances. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting a 0-75' zone hardcover and setback variance for 3135 Casco Circle allowing the existing lakeside deck to remain. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-282 AND SECTION 78-1288 (B) FILE NO. 03-2936 WHEREAS, Bruce F. Meese & Maureen E. Murphy, husband and wife (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 313 5 Casco Circle within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 41, that part of Lot 64, that part of vacated Lake Shore A venue, and that part of the tract of land between said avenue and the shore of Lake Minnetonka, all described as beginning at the Northwest corner of Lot 41, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case Number 16333; thence South along the West line of Lot 41 and its extension, a distance of 219.07 feet, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case Number 16333; thence continuing South along said extension to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence Easterly along said shore to its intersection with the southerly extension of the East line of Lot 41; thence North to the Northeast corner of Lot 41; thence Northeasterly to a point on the Northeasterly line of Lot 64 distant 30.0 feet Northwesterly from the most Easterly corner of Lot 64, thence Northwesterly along said Northwesterly line to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and 24.00 feet Southeasterly, measured at right angles from the Northwesterly line of Lot 64 and its extension, which a point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case Number 16333; thence Southerly a distance of 51.35 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning; all in SPRING PARK, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said County. (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-282 and Section 78-1288 (B) to allow a lakeside deck and adjacent retaining walls to remain in the 0-75' zone, such deck and retaining wall constituting structure and 6% hardcover ( excluding allowed stairway access) when no structure and 0% hardcover is normally allowed. Page 1 of 6 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #03-2936. 2. The property is located in the LR -1 C zoning district, which requires a minimum lot area of ½ acre and a minimum lot width of 100 feet. The applicants' property is .49 acres and has a width of 60 feet. 3. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on August 18, 2003. The City Council reviewed the application at regularly scheduled meetings held on September 8 and September 22, 2003 and granting conceptual approval of the hardcover variance for the 0-75' zone based on the following findings: a. The nature of the property in the 0-75' zone 1s steep slopes being supported by retaining walls. b. Currently; the existing lakeshore deck is bolted to a concrete retaining wall which is supporting 8' of earth. c. After engineering reviews, the interdependency of the wall on the deck is inconclusive; however, Council action to require removal of the deck may have unintended negative consequences. Should the deck be required to be removed and detached from the retaining wall, there is the potential that the retaining wall may fail, subsequently causing slope failure. d. The existing conditions of the retaining wall and attached deck support the slope. e. Absent the unique conditions noted above, the lakeshore deck would normally not be allowed to remain, as it is a nonconforming structure and the property is undergoing a complete teardown/rebuild of the principal structure. Page 2 of 6 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire 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 hardcover variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-282 and 78- 1288 (B) to allow and existing lakeside deck to remain in the 0-75' zone, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone shall not increase above the 6% level. Applicants are advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. 3. Should at any point in time the retaining wall or deck need to be replaced, the lakeside deck must be removed in its entirety and shall not be replaced. Also, the slope must be re-vegetated with plant material approved by City staff in the event that the deck is removed. As allowed by Section 78-1282, a 32 square foot landing may be constructed in the 0-75' zone in the event that the deck is replaced but under no circumstances may a 32 square foot landing be constructed in Page 3 of 6 addition to the lakeside deck. The existing lattice work below the deck shall be replaced by vegetation. 5. 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 construction of the new house within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (October 13, 2004). 6. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 7. The undersigned applicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants' heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain oftitle of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 13 th day of October, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner( s) Page 4 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of , 2003 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor 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 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of 2003 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. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 State of Minnesota ) ) ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this_ day of _____ , 2003 by Bruce F. Meese, husband of Maureen E. Murphy, husband and wife. Notary Public State of Minnesota ) ) ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this_ day of _____ , 2003 by Maureen E. Murphy, wife of Bruce F. Meese, husband and wife. Notary Public Page 6 of 6 \ -w· :: N ~ en N 0 r--. z 932.0 10 940.6 934. 931.3 -ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE 929 · ·. ;,.s LOCA iED ~NE 30, 2003 LAKE MINNETONKA 929. - I C t (; --- - - I ' + I"' n CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 TO: Bruce Meese & Maureen Murphy 313 5 Casco Circle Orono, MN 55391 ZONING FILE: #03-2936 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: September 23, 2003 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance to allow a lakeside deck DATE OF MEETING: September 22, 2003 VOTE: 3 FOR O AGAINST Motion: To approve the variance to allow 6% hardcover in the 0-75' zone, which amounts to the existing lakeside deck and adjacent retaining walls, stipulating that the existing deck skirt be removed and the shore be appropriately re-vegetated in this location. Also, should the retaining wall and/or deck be removed anytime in the future, the deck cannot be replaced. A resolution approving this variance will be drafted and placed on the next City Council meeting to be held on Monday, October 13, 2003. A copy of this resolution will be mailed to you prior to the meeting. Variance approval is limited to the extent shown on approved plan and as noted in the approval resolution. Changes in approved plans are subject to further review by the City. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. Date Application Received: 7-23-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 7-23-03 60-Day Review Period Expires: 9-22-03 and extended to 11-21-03 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: September 19, 2003 Item No.: Department Approval: Name: Janice Waataja ~ Title: City Planner Administrator Approval: Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #03-2936, Bruce Meese & Maureen Murphy, 3135 Casco Circle, -Hardcover Variance Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Area: List of Exhibits LR-IC, One Family Lakeshore Residential District(½ acre min.) .49 acres (21,392 s.f.) 60 feet A -Survey Showing Location of Deck B -Survey of Entire Property C -Letter from BKBM Engineers dated 9-4-03 D -Letter from City Engineer dated 9-10-03 E Council Action Notice from 8-25-03 City Council Meeting F Council Memo from 8-25-03 City Council Meeting Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variance to allow an existing lakeside deck to remain: 1. Hardcover variance to allow 6% hardcover in the 0-75' zone when 0% is allowed and 14% currently exists. Additional Information Please review the letter from BKBM Engineers and the comments of the City Engineer regarding the deck and its necessity to support the retaining wall. Planning Commission Recommendation Approval consistent with staffs recommendation on a vote of 4-1 at the August 18, 2003 meeting. The dissenting commissioner (Hawn) would have allowed the deck to remain in place. Staff recommended: 1. Denial of the hardcover variance to allow 6% hardcover in the 0-75' zone when 0% is normally allowed, to be consistent with what has been consistently approved for rebuild situations. In addition, the applicants were allowed a 32 square foot landing, as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance, in place of the existing lakeside deck. Also, if the applicants choose, the 20 square foot lock box allowance could be used towards square footage of the landing but not in addition to a lock box. The lakeshore stairway is allowed to remain in place for access to the shore. Staff Recommendation Approval consistent with Planning Commissions above recommendation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Council has to following options: 1. Direct staff to draft a denial resolution denying a hardcover variance for the 0-75' zone which would require the deck be removed, 2. Direct staff to draft a resolution approving the hardcover variance for the 0-75' zone which would allow the deck to remain, or 3. Table the request to allow the applicants to conduct a further analysis of the deck and its necessity in supporting the retaining wall. \ \. \ - ~ 0) w· ::: ~ 0) N 0 " z 932.0 10 I I 961.f se, ,- ,-seo 940.6 934. 931.J -ORDlNARY HIGH WATER UNE 929 • . · AS LOCATED JUNE 30, 2003 LAKE MINNETONKA - i { r (. --- -- --------- -"' -i .10 - \ 10 \ / - ~ <"O., oe.t-10TE.S uTil..liY POLE OHE oe.No-re.s ove.Rl-le.,,.o eu;.c EMO oE.NOTES TELE.Pt-lONE SOX \ 0 oe.NoTE.S sE.T IRON l,IONU~ • owoTE.5 FOUND \RON Mm @ owoTES JUO\CW-i.,e.NOW ~ owotE.S souLDER REf NN ----oE.NoTES BLOCK REfAlNiN\ MAP OE.NOiES !,1/\PLE jREE 9J20 Scptemb-~r 4, 2003 Mr. Jeff Danberry The Dan::,erry Company 4410 Shi>rcline Drive Spring Park, MN 55384 Re: 31:,5 Casoo Circle Orono, l\1N 55391 Zoning File #03-2936 Dear Jeff: l4]UUJ S930 Brooklyn Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55429-2518 {763) 843-0420 Fax: (763) 843-0421 E-mail: bkbm@bkbm.com On Wednesday, September 3, 2003, at your request, we performed a site visit at the referenced address to review the, retaining wa.il near the lake shoreline. The concrete wall appears to have been constructed to provide a level area near the water. It runs parallel to the water's edge and is braced on the ends by concrete returns. It retains approximately eight foet of earth. At some time, the area was in-filled with a wooden deck:. The rim of the deck is bolted directly to the full length of the wall and one on return. The rim is using the wall for support. Within the last few years, the entire wall ha.<, been covered with rough-sawn fencing material that makes a complete review of the wall impossible. In several areas where the wall is exposed, there are signs of cracking in the concrete. It is mJ.r opinion that the retaining wall was not originally designed to require the supplemental bracing of the deck However, due to the present deterioration of the concrete in the wall, the deck may be providing some :stability. The opinions stated in this report are based on limited visual observations :,nly. No physical testing has been pe1formed and no calculations have been made to determine the adequacy of the structural system or to determine its compliance Vii.th accepted building code requir.Ements. Sincerely, BAKKE KOPP BALLO ~ John B. Thiesse, P.E. Direct Line: (763) 843•0458 Principal Z:\JOHNT\J.ffiMOS,COR'.RESP.ETC\DANBERRY.09,04-03.DOC BKBM ENGINEERS An Equal Opportisnity Employer ~ --u Bonestroo Rosene Anderlil< & Associates Enginee r s &. Arch i t e cts September 10, 2003 Ms. Janice Waataja Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: 3135 Casco Circle File No . 139-03-000 Plat No. 03-2936 Dear Janice: ;troo, Ro sene, Anderlik and A ss ocia t e s, Inc. is an Affirm a1. employee Owned · Action/Equal Opportunit y Employe r Pr inc i p a l s : Otto G. Bonestroo, P.E. • Marvin L. Sorvala, P.E .• Glenn R. Cook, P.E .• Robert G. Schunicht P.E • Jerry A. Bour don, P.E. • Mark A. Hanson, P.E. ' · · Se nior Consulta nts: Robert W. Rosene, P.E . • Joseph C. Anderlik, P.E .• Richard E. Turner, P.E .• Susan M. Eberl in, C.P.A. A ss oci a te Principa ls: Keith A. Gordon, P.E . • Robert R. Pfefferle, P.E .• Richard w. Foster, P.E .• David o . loskota, P.E .• Mrchael T. Ra _utmann, P.E . • Ted K. Field, P.E. • Kenneth P. Anderson, P.E , • Mark R. Rolfs, P.E .• David A. Bonestroo, M.B.A .• Srdney P. Wrllramson, P.E., LS. • Agnes M. Ring, M .8.A. • Allan Rick Schmidt, P.E .• Thomas w. Peterson, P.E .• James R. Maland, P.E. • M rles 8, Jensen, P.E . • L. Phillip Gravel Ill, P.E .• Daniel J . Edgerton, P.E , • Ismael Martinez, P.E .• Thomas A. Syfko, P.E. • Sheldon J. Johnson • Dale A. Grove, P.E. • Thomas A. Roushar, P.E. • Robert J. Devery, P.E. Offices: St. Paul, St. Cloud, Rochester and Willmar, MN • Milwaukee, WI. Chicago, IL W ebsite: wwW:bonestroo.com We have reviewed the letter from BKBM Engineers dated September 4 , 2003 regarding the retaining wall at 3135 Casco Circle. The letter is inconclusive as to whether the deck is necessary to support the existing retaining wall. We recommend that the structures be further analyzed to determine the interdependency of the wall on the deck. \Vs aavo the fvHe ,1i'ing GQ~onts V'i tR regrud5 te, ~nsin~iQllB 111aU@~ If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly, / BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. ~!{4f!J- Tom Kellogg Cc : Greg Gappa, City of Orono 2335 W es t Hi ghway 36 • S t . Pau l, MN 55 11 3 ■ 65 1-636-4600 ■ Fax: 651-636 -1311 CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 TO: Bruce Meese & Maureen Murphy 313 5 Casco Circle Orono, MN 55391 WNING FILE: #03-2936 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: August 27, 2003 COPIES: Stonehouse Designs Carrigan Curtis 420 East Rice Street Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variances (lot area/width, hardcover) DATE OF MEETING: August 25, 2003 VOTE: 3 FOR O AGAINST MOTION: Approval of the lot area and lot width variances and a hardcover variance for the 250- 500' zone per the findings and conditions of the attached, revised resolution. Table the hardcover variance for the 0-75' zone. The applicants were directed to have a certified engineer inspect the condition of the bank as to whether or not the deck is reinforcing the retaining wall. The applicants shall submit their engineer's finding for review by the City's engineer prior to placement on the next City Council agenda. A separate resolution will be drafted for this variance request following a decision by the City Council. Variance approval is limited to the extent shown on approved plan and as noted in the approval resolution. Changes in approved plans are subject to further review by the City. Variance approval expires one year after date of approval. A building permit must be obtained no later than August 25, 2004. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. Date Application Received: 7-23-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 7-23-03 60-Day Review Period Expires: 9-22-03 Department Approval: Name: Janice Waataja Title: City Planner REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Administrator Approval: Date: August 22, 2003 Item No.: Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #03-2936, Bruce Meese & Maureen Murphy, 3135 Casco Circle, -Variances -Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Area: List of Exhibits LR-IC, One Family Lakeshore Residential District(½ acre min.) .49 acres (21,392 s.f.) 60 feet A Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendation B -PC Action Notice 8-20-03 C -PC Memo and Exhibits of 8-13-03 Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variances to construct a new home: 1. Lot area variance to allow reconstruction of a home on a .49 acre lot when .5 acres is required. 2. Lot width variance to allow reconstruction of a home where the width at the shoreline and 75' setback is 60' when 100' is normally required. 3. Hardcover variance to allow 6% hardcover in the 0-75' zone when 0% is allowed and to allow 37% hardcover in the 250-500' zone when 30% is allowed. Planning Commission Recommendation Approval consistent with staffs recommendation on a vote of 4-1. The dissenting commissioner (Hawn) would have allowed the deck to remain in place. Staff recommended: 1. Approval of the lot area variance to allow reconstruction of a home. 2. Approval of the lot width variance to allow reconstruction of a home. 3. Denial of the hardcover variance to allow 6% hardcover in the 0-75 foot zone when 0% is required to be consistent with what has been approved on rebuild lots. 4. Approval of the hardcover variance to allow 37% hardcover in the 250-500' zone when 30% is required due to the minimal area allotted in this zone and sight visibility triangles which result in a larger driveway. In addition, the applicants are allowed a 32 square foot landing, as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance, in place of the existing lakeside deck. Also, if the applicants choose, the 20 square foot lock box allowance can be used towards square footage of the landing but not in addition to a lock box. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting a lot area and lot width and hardcover variances for 3135 Casco Circle. CITY of ORONO September 18, 2003 Bruce Meese & Maureen Murphy 3135 Casco Circle Orono , MN 55391 Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Municipal Offices Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 RE: 60-day Review Period Extension for the Hardcover Variance to Allow a Lakeside Deck Dear Mr. Meese & Mrs. Murphy: State law provides that Cities shall make decisions on zoning requests within 60 days from the date of application, and that this review period may be extended by notification to the applicant. Your application was received on July 23, 2003 and the 60-day review period would end on September 22, 2003 . However, because your application was tabled by the City Council at the August 25 , 2003 meeting, the earliest potential date of final Council action falls after the 60-day period ends. Therefore, the 60-day review period is hereby extended an additional 60 days to November 21, 2003. Your application is scheduled to be heard at the September 22 , 2003 meeting. Please mail/fax /drop off a copy of this letter with your signature indicating that yo u have been notified of this extension. The Cities mailing address is Post Office Box 66, Crystal Bay, MN 55323 and our fax number is (952) 249-4616. Thank you and please call me at (952) 249-4623 should you have further questions. Sincerely, City of Orono ()a,ua/JJul'-f Janice Waataja CityP:a~e/ ,~ .1'1'L 1"}1~ rn,1--v'.\~ I Bruce Meese and/or Maureen Murphy am aware of ilise Telephone (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 www.ci.orono.mn.us Date Application Received: 4-23-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 7-11-03 60-Day Review Period Expires: 9-9-03 Department Approval: Name: Janice Waataj a~ Title: City Planner REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Administrator Approval: Date: August 22, 2003 Item No.: Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #03-2936, Bruce Meese & Maureen Murphy, 3135 Casco Circle, -Variances -Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Area: List of Exhibits LR 1 C, One Family Lakeshore Residential District(½ acre min.) .49 acres (21,392 s.f.) 60 feet A -Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendation B -PC Action Notice 8-20-03 C -PC Memo and Exhibits of 8-13-03 Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variances to construct a new home: 1. Lot area variance to allow reconstruction of a home on a .49 acre lot when .5 acres is required. 2. Lot width variance to allow reconstruction of a home where the width at the shoreline and 75' setback is 60' when 100' is normally required. 3. Hardcover variance to allow 6% hardcover in the 0-75' zone when 0% is allowed and to allow 37% hardcover in the 250-500' zone when 30% is allowed. Planning Commission Recommendation Approval consistent with staffs recommendation on a vote of 4-1. The dissenting commissioner (Hawn) would have allowed the deck to remain in place. Staff recommended: 1. Approval of the lot area variance to allow reconstruction of a home. 2. Approval of the lot width variance to allow reconstruction of a home. 3. Denial of the hardcover variance to allow 6% hardcover in the 0-75 foot zone when 0% is required to be consistent with what has been approved on rebuild lots. 4. Approval of the hardcover variance to allow 37% hardcover in the 250-500' zone when 30% is required due to the minimal area allotted in this zone and sight visibility triangles which result in a larger driveway. In addition, the applicants are allowed a 32 square foot landing, as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance, in place of the existing lakeside deck. Also, if the applicants choose, the 20 square foot lock box allowance can be used towards square footage of the landing but not in addition to a lock box. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting a lot area and lot width and hardcover variances for 3135 Casco Circle. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25 SUBDIVISION 6 (b ), SECTION 10.22 SUBDIVISION 2, AND SECTION 10.56 SUBDIVISION 16 (1) FILE NO. #03-2936 WHEREAS, Bruce Meese & Maureen Murphy (husband & wife), (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 313 5 Casco Circle within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 41, that part of Lot 64, that part of vacated Lake Shore A venue, and that part of the tract of land between said avenue and the shore of Lake Minnetonka, all described as beginning at the Northwest corner of Lot 41, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case Number 16333; thence South along the West line of Lot 41 and its extension, a distance of219.07 feet, which point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case Number 16333; thence continuing South along said extension to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence Easterly along said shore to its intersection with the southerly extension of the East line of Lot 41; thence North to the Northeast corner of Lot 41; thence Northeasterly to a point on the Northeasterly line of Lot 64 distant 30.0 feet Northwesterly from the most Easterly corner of Lot 64, thence Northwesterly along said Northwesterly line to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and 24.00 feet Southeasterly, measured at right angles from the Northwesterly line of Lot 64 and its extension, which a point is marked by a Judicial Landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case Number 16333; thence Southerly a distance of 51.35 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning; all in SPRING PARK, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said County. (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25 Subdivision 6 (b ), Section 10.22 Subdivision 2, and Section 10.56 Subdivision 16 (1) to rebuild a home on the existing lot. Page 1 of 6 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #03-2936. 2. The property is located in the LR 1 C zoning district, which requires a minimum lot area of ½ acre and a minimum lot width of 100 feet. The applicant's property is .49 acres and has a width of 60 feet. 3. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on August 18, 2003 and recommended approval of the lot area, lot width and hardcover variances based on the following findings: a. The property is .49 acres in size when .50 acres is required. b. The property has a lot width of 60 feet at the shoreline and 75' setback when 100' is required. c. Because the lot is being reviewed as a rebuild, the lot must conform to current Zoning Ordinance standards or a hardship shall be presented. No convincing hardship was presented to allow the lakeside deck to remam. d. Due to the configuration of the lot, minimal area exists in the 250-500' zone, hence a variance to allow excess hardcover for the proposed detached garage is not reasonable. e. Because of sight visibility problems on Casco Circle, a turnaround is necessary to safely exit the drive. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning Page 2 of 6 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 variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25 Subdivision 6 (b), Section 10.22 Subdivision 2, and Section 10.56 Subdivision 16 (1) to allow a house to be rebuilt on an existing lot, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. Approval is based on the hardcover amounts listed in the planning report. This allows 0% hardcover in the 0-75' zone with the exception of retaining walls that may be needed for bank stabilization and a stairway. 22.4% hardcover is allowed in the 75-250' zone and 37% hardcover is allowed in the 250-500' zone. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone shall not increase above the XX%. 3. Hardcover in the 75-250' zone shall be limited to O s.f. or 0% per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit A. 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. 4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (August 25, 2004). Page 3 of 6 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicant's 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 25 th day of August, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner( s) Page 4 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of ____ , 2003 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor 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 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of ____ , 2003 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. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this _ day of ____ , 2003, ___________ personally appeared before me, __ who is personally known to me __ whose identity I proved on the basis of _____________ _ __ whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of __________ _ a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Notary Public On this _ day of ___ , 2003, __________ personally appeared before me, __ who is personally known to me __ whose identity I proved on the basis of _____________ _ __ whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of __________ _ a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public Page 6 of 6 ,.,, \ \ '\; \ ' 10 968.2 • ota--tO t:,e.-@ jUJY\◊ v<J,.-. c;eoc::o 1:,2 5,f. l,O..M.IXl~_,..---,-- P<,\IOW~ MAP .L CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box66 ZONING FILE: #03-2936 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: August 21, 2003 TO: Bruce Meese & Maureen Murphy 313 5 Casco Circle Orono, MN 55391 COPIES: Stonehouse Designs • Carrigan Curtis 420 East Rice Street Wayzata, MN 55391 }'X.~~ 9_1~_ ~~~_!.,J~A1-:_IQ~:..-____ Variances (lot area/width, hardcover) _________ _ DATE OF MEETING: August 18, 2003 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approval subject to staffs recommendation. The existing deck has to be removed, however the applicants can utilize a maximum of a 52 s.f. landing (32 s.f. which is allowed by Ordinance plus the 20 s.f. of lock box). A lock box cannot be utilized in addition to the 20 s.f. being applied toward the landing. VOTE: 4 FOR 1 AGAINST Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council -Monday, August 25, 2003; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Waataja at 952-249-4623. Date Application Received: 7-23-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 8-4-03 60-Day Review Period Expires: 10-3-03 To: From: Date: Chair Smith and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Janice Waataja, City Planner(}JJ August 13, 2003 #03-2936 August 18, 2003 Page 1 of8 Subject: #03-2936, Bruce Meese & Maureen Murphy, 3135 Casco Circle -Variances (lot area, lot width, hardcover in 0-75' and 250-500' zones) -Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR -1 C, One Family Lakeshore Residential District(½ acre min.) .49 acres (21,392 s.f.) Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variances to construct a new home: 1. Lot area variance to allow reconstruction of a home on a .49 acre lot when .5 acres is required. 2. Lot width variance to allow reconstruction of a home where the width at the shoreline and 75' setback is 60' when 100' is normally required. 3. Hardcover variance to allow 6% hardcover in the 0-75' zone when 0% is allowed and to allow 37% hardcover in the 250-500' zone when 30% is allowed. Sta.ff Recommendation: Staff recommendations: 1. Approval of the lot area variance to allow reconstruction of a home. 2. Approval of the lot width variance to allow reconstruction of a home. 3. Denial of the hardcover variance to allow 6% hardcover in the 0-75 foot zone when 0% is required to be consistent with what has been approved on rebuild lots. 4. Approval of the hardcover variance to allow 37% hardcover in the 250-500' zone when 30% is required due to the minimal area allotted in this zone and sight visibility triangles which result in a larger driveway. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (b): "Lot. The following minimum requirements shall be observed ... [Lot Area= ½ acre, Lot Width= 100 feet]". Section 10.22, Subdivision 2: Lakeshore Hardcover and Land Alteration Regulations. Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (1): Hardcover Limitations. List of Exhibits A -Application B-Adjacent Property Owners Acknowledgment Form C -Hardship Statement D -Existing Survey E -Proposed Survey F -Proposed Elevations and Floor Plans G -Submitted Hardcover Calculations H-Letter dated August 12, 2003 from City Engineer, Tom Kellogg I-Photographs J -Property Owners List K Plat Map Background #03-2936 August 18, 2003 Page 2 of8 The applicant originally applied for a variance to remodel the existing home and allow an existing, non-conforming 8' setback in the southwestern comer of the home to remain to try and save an existing large maple tree. After reviewing the plans and conversations with the architect it became apparent that the majority of the existing home was to be demolished to accommodate the renovations, and if the true intention was to save the tree the home should be shifted north. Because of this staff directed the applicant that the project would be reviewed as a rebuild and that the home should be shifted to meet the 10' setback requirement. The applicant agreed to this and submitted new plans applying for a lot area and lot width variance. Upon further examination of the plans it was discovered that the new home would meet the hardcover requirements in the 75-250' zone but the 0-75'and 250-500' zones, as they currently exist, are over on hardcover. Due to the rebuild, the whole lot is reviewed for hardcover compliance and has required the applicant to now apply for hardcover vanances. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot Area/Width: LR-lC Lot Area Lot Width Required 21,780 s.f. (½ acre) 100' Actual 21,392 s.f. (.49 acres) 60' Setbacks: LR-lC Required Existing Proposed Front 30' n/a n/a Rear 30' 51 ' (garage) 31 ' (garage) 120' (house) 94' (house) Left Side 10' Right Side 10' Lake shore 75' Average Lakeshore 136.5' Structural Coverage: Total Lot Area 21,392 s.f. (.49 acres) Hardcover Calculations: Hardcover Total Area in Zone Zone 0-75 4,514 s.f. 75-250 10,573 s.f. 250-500 6,305 s.f. 8' 14.5' 139' 139' 10' 10' 138' 138' #03-2936 August 18, 2003 Page 3 of8 Total Structural Coverage Allowed: 3,208.8 s.f. (15%) Proposed: 2,861 s.f. (13.3%) Allowed Existing Proposed Hardcover Hardcover Hardcover 0 s.f 634.25 s.f. * 279.25 s.f. (0%) (14%) (6.0%) 2,643.25 s.f. 2,233 s.f.* 2,369 s.f. (25%) (21.1 %) (22.4%) 1,891.5 s.f. 2,194.5 s.f.* 2,332.5 s.f. (30%) (34.8%) (37%) * After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Lot Area/Lot Width Variance The property dates back to 1955, prior to our current Zoning Ordinance requirements and thus creates a hardship. The lot is a legal lot of record and therefore is buildable. Because the house is being rebuilt and not renovated a lot area and lot width variance must be reviewed as a formality. The lot is approximately 21,392 s.f. or .49 acres in area, just short of the 22,000 s.f (.50 acre) requirement. The property measures 60' in width at the shoreline as well as at the 75' setback line, 40' short of the 100' width requirement. This is generally the characteristics of lots in this neighborhood. Hardcover Variance The applicants bought the property this past winter. In doing so, they've decided to rebuild. The new plans meet the hardcover requirements for the 75-250' zone. Because the house is being rebuilt the entire lot is reviewed for hardcover compliance. Both the 0- 75' and 250-500' zones are non-compliant as they currently exist. In the 0-7 5' zone there is approximately 14% of hardcover. This includes a circular concrete patio, fire-pit, stairway, boulder retaining walls, and deck. The applicants have agreed to remove the circular concrete patio and fire-pit which results in 355 s.f. or 7.4% #03-2936 August 18, 2003 Page 4 of8 of the hardcover in the zone. There also are retaining walls consisting of 53 s.f. or 1.2% hardcover in the zone. The applicants have not mentioned removing these and the slope leading to the lake is steep and highly vegetated. Thus, the walls are probably being used to control drainage and protect the deck. There is also a 226.26 s.f. lakeside deck which results in 5.0% of the hardcover. The applicants did minor repairs to the deck and would like to keep it. Lastly, the stairway is an allowed use on the 0-75' zone and was not counted in the 14% hardcover figure and can remain. To be consistent in reviewing rebuilds, staff would recommend that the lakeside deck be removed. This would limit the hardcover in the 0-75' zone to retaining walls (53 s.f.) and the allowed stairway. If the deck were removed, hardcover in the 0-75' zone would be 53 s.f. or 1.2% when 0% is normally required. In the 250-500' zone there is approximately 2,194.5 s.f. or 34.8% hardcover. This includes the existing garage which has non-conforming setbacks, a concrete patio, and a conservative driveway. The applicants would like to tear down the existing garage and rebuild a three car garage meeting setback requirements. The concrete patio would be removed. The driveway would remain conservative and include a tum-around for safety purposes. The proposed hardcover, taking into account the new garage and revised driveway, would bring the hardcover to 2,332.5 s.f. or 37%. Staff has found that the new garage and revised driveway are reasonable and that attempts have been made to meet Zoning Ordinance requirements. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit A, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In considering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keepinfl with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoninfl Code. In the 0-75' zone, hardcover will be going from 14% to 6%, a greater than 50% reduction. However, staff finds that no hardship exists to allow the lakeside deck to remain. The Planning Commission should decide whether the applicants have made a good faith effort in removing existing hardcover (fire-pit and concrete patio). The Planning Commission should also decide whether a hardship exists in the fact that the applicants bought the house with the deck and since have made minor repairs to improve it. In spite of this, to be consistent with prior rebuild applications, staff would recommend that it be removed due to a lack of a convincing hardship. Should the Planning Commission decide to require removal of the deck, the retaining walls, accounting for 53 s.f., could also be removed as they are controlling drainage to protect #03-2936 August 18, 2003 Page 5 of8 the deck. Staff does find a hardship in allowing 37% hardcover in the 250-500' zone. The orientation of the property results in very little area in the zone (6,305 s.f.). Because of the narrowness of the lot, to meet the hardcover restrictions in the 75-250' zone, the garage is forced to be towards the street end of the property. The applicants have made a good faith effort in trying to meet Zoning Ordinance requirements by moving the garage to meet setbacks. Also, a three car garage is not uncharacteristic with rebuilds. The proposed driveway, with tum-around, is not unreasonable due to safety concerns on Casco Circle. Therefore, staff would recommend approval of the hardcover variance in the 250-500' zone allowing 37% hardcover when 30% is normally allowed due to the narrowness of the lot, limited area in the zone, and the sight visibility issues on Casco Circle requiring a tum-around. Staff would make the following recommendations in regards to the criteria for "undue hardship" pertinent to this application: 1. "The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls." The property can remain in its current state should the variances be denied. Any rebuild or remodel which resulted in added hardcover would require hardcover variances because the lot is currently over in the 0-75' zone and the 250-500' zone. 2. "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." The lot area and width hardships and the hardcover hardship in the 250-500' zone result from the long and narrow orientation of the lot which is unique to the property, not circumstances created by the landowner. However, there are no unique circumstances within the 0-75' zone, unique to the property, which create a hardship not created by the landowner. The Planning Commission should discuss whether a hardship exists in the fact that the current owners didn't construct the deck but inherited it with the property. 3. "The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." Should the lot area, lot width, and hardcover variances be granted, the essential character of the locality would not be compromised. Many of the lots in the neighborhood have similar non-conformities. 4. "Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." Not applicable #03-2936 August 18, 2003 Page 6 of8 5. "Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter." 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." The uses proposed are allowed uses in the LR -1 C district. 7. "The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling." Not applicable 8. "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property." Many of the properties along the lake in this general locality have long and narrow conditions providing hardships for lot area and lot width variances. However, because this is a rebuild there are not special conditions peculiar to this property which might lead to allowing the lakeside deck and/or possibly the three car garage. The Planning Commission should discuss whether the lakeside deck should be allowed because the property was purchased with the deck and the current property owner isn't responsible for creating the non-conformity, and also whether the limited area in the 250-500' zone provides special conditions which could justify allowing three car garage. 9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." The unique conditions resulting in lot area and lot width variances do not generally apply to the entire LR -1 C district but rather to a handful of the surrounding neighborhood's lakeshore lots. 10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." Granting of the lot area and width variances is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. These variances are required to simply develop the lot. #03-2936 August 18, 2003 Page 7 of8 The hardcover variance requests should be reviewed individually to determine if the uses fall into a substantial right. Again, what is reasonable due to proven hardships found to be inherent to the property. 11. "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 granting of the lot area and lot width variances will not impair the intent of the Zoning Code because the property is a lot of record and is legally a buildable piece of property. The granting of the proposed hardcover variances may affect the intent of the Zoning Code especially in the 0-7 5 'zone. This is due to the rebuild status of the property and what has consistently been approved and found to be reasonable. The Planning Commission should discuss whether the lakeside deck and three car garage are reasonable and whether they meet the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 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." The lot area and lot width variances would be necessary to alleviate hardships inherent in rebuilding the lot. The Planning Commission should discuss the lakeside deck and three car garage and whether allowing them would alleviate hardship or serve as a convenience. Staff finds that approval of the lakeside deck would merely be a convenience and the three car garage alleviates the hardship of the limited area present to accommodate a reasonably sized garage and associated parking. Issues for Consideration 1. Have the applicants shown a good faith effort to reduce hardcover? 2. Is inheritance of a non-conformity a valid hardship for current property owners? 3. Would allowing the lakeside deck serve as a convenience or alleviate a hardship? 4. Does the limited area in the 250-500' zone alone justify allowing a three car garage which has become the standard with rebuilds, even when a standard two car garage would still result in hardcover beyond what is allowed? 5. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Approval of the lot area and lot width variances which are formalities with all rebuilds on legal lots of record that were created prior to adoption of the current Zoning Code. Denial of the hardcover variance in the 0-75' zone to allow a lakeside deck. Consistently staff has required full compliance in the 0-75' zone with rebuilds. No convincing hardship has been presented which constitutes variance approval. #03-2936 August 18, 2003 Page 8 of8 Approval of the hardcover variance in the 250-500' zone due to the limited area existing in the zone and the hardships which result from sight visibility problems on Casco Circle. The applicants have shown a good faith effort in meeting Zoning Ordinance standards by moving the garage to meet setback and what has been proposed is not unreasonable. In conjunction with building permit review and at the request of the City Engineer (see Exhibit G), the applicant must submit final plans which include existing and proposed contours extending at least 50' beyond the subject property lot lines. The proposed grades should include drainage swales along the east and west lot lines. CITY OF ORONO -VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee ~ ($50.00 per each additional variance)· Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) -·-- Variance for non-conforming structures C!??_g~ After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Application # 0 3-6\ q 3 Co Date Received 7-8-~-0 3. Amount Paid ~-?:,QO . o 0 Site Address 3/ 3 S C ~" Sc o C 1,,. c I~ Oro,-. a <;;S31 / Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) c:2 o -)/'7-oJ3-L./3 -DD'9.Cf Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired :fet h :? / . da')61. · (month/year) I (do)~ also own the adjacen( parcels of land. Present use of property: -X_residential __ other (specify). _________ _ Zoning District: __________________________ _ APPLICANT . Phone (home) 'IQ -~/"JI-/,;J7(c; Name L5rt1c-e.-/J'Jc-c<;,.-'2..-9--'?ll,1t.tt"e€"" l12:1r~iPhone (work) ta-79ct..-z3~0 c,;. 731.,// Address: 3./ sf: (AScc) C, rck City:r O t{),, ~ Zip: 5:$39/ o,Y>,-ER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) 'l<;;) L/rJ/ O2tz Name [3rqce..dlr..es'.z__ 1:: /ll,t..t1Nte,;.. /21u,-1ACi Phone (work) ful:] 79? 73i/o or-73'-// Address: ;S/ 3 < C,q xa CIK/-e< 1ty: (>cno Zip: <;;C.3 91 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: Estimated Construction Cost $ 8 oc, o o~ c~ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED , I. Lot Area _x. Lot Width Hardcover __ Lot. Coverage Q Setback: Front -:t Side Rear Average Lakeshore __ Other (specify) _______________________ _ HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficul preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:._~1..e.J"--~~~~~~------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) -~• , ... ,." !.. 1 I \ .. . , ' ,, REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. ./ / ,/ Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-5910), Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8½" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8½" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8½" x 11"). 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). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and corr7~/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature ~ Date rJ-//,... () S ~~ O\VNER'S SIGNATURE The mvner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property· by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of inv .:,ation and verification of this request. Date 7-1/-0 3 Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 7 .r·r;.;;:, ;;-: Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) .Tu ±f,, I:b-Ldf\ ~,.J f [print name(s)] I of 5 Ii..{') GJs-u, Liv e/e [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at 3\ 3s (ASG.x t r~J-'<-. also referred to as Land Use Application No. ____ . I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. -1 ~ .j{~----.l~c Property dwner ~ 1-d-d--0 i Date Date ****************************************************************************** I (we)"T-c ~5:,l.2::-{\\ (A Cc J\.e(s,~u. l l-;-- (print name(s)] of 513~ C ""-(cu C. i •L-¼" [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at 3 I,) c;-(\iscc2 ("~ also referred to as Land Use Application No. ___ _ I (vve) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council <!Pproval. I . _I l ,· ' ,,.--------:~:"/ d./ --/ .... d .-:::::..-----.....__-----.. f-i8perty Owner Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. U ,U Ct _ ",, ,.{: ·· ,·• f =:J l ar.>'j;r.c:/~! ,. , '.~, \/,·.c·-·-:.',-.·· ::},'}\ :_1 -~ri °h,ii-JM ;;~.:~."'~,:-;'.;:-., __ -._.·,<°.'! !'.·; •:.~;'=r.:.fi '-'::,0i1/ ")1'1~ I I ~· --..:.c._...:.;.,, \c.,t;_~~;:-::: . ...1 Maureen Murphy and Bruce Meese 3135 Casco Circle Orono, MN 55391 August 11, 2003 Janice W aataj a City of Orono P.O. box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Dear Janice, We are writing to you regarding our above-mentioned property and our zoning application #03-2936. In your letter to us dated July 29t\ you mention that if we were to rebuild our house within the 1 O' setback, we would only be required to request a width variance. We will be rebuilding our house rather than remodeling due to your recommendations. However, we have since learned that we would also need a hardcover variance for the 0' to 75' zone and the 250' to 500' zone. Due to this new information, we have decided to rebuild our non-conforming garage as well. No new work will be performed in the O' to 75' zone and to show a good faith effort in reducing our hardcover in that area, we will be removing the circular concrete pad and the fire pit in this zone. In the 250' to 500' zone, we will be tearing down the existing garage, which is currently structurally unsound, and will be building a new garage within the required setbacks, without turning the front of the garage towards the street. In doing this, the 250' to 500' zone, however, will still be over the 30% hardcover requirement. It will be almost impossible to drop the size of the current driveway without eliminating a turnaround on the property. 3135 Casco Circle is located on a blind and dangerous curve and without turning around on the property, drivers are required to "sneak" out into this curve when leaving, without having a clear view of approaching traffic. We are requesting a hardcover variance for the 0' to 75' and 250' to 500' zones. We understand the City's position regarding these issues, and believe we have made reasonable compromises and have worked hard to conform to the City of Orono's require~ments. . Sinc···er .·.Zz__ / / e,/ c:/ /4aureen Murphy and ·- Bruce Meese ----- + 9401 ~ FDIP 1 ;2"0P£N 932.0 I SETBACK-: -963 ~, 962---i 10 .- - 954.7 • 11 r, i?-1-f2"0P£N .l.. j-\._ j / - \ DENOTliS UT\l.!TY POLE oHE DENOTtS ovERl1E/>J) El.EC EM O DENOTES n,LEP\10NE sol'- 0 DENOTliS $ET \RON MONll~ • DENOTES FOUND \RON !,IOI (!} DENOTES JUDICIAL t.ANOMI ~ DENOTES BOULDER RE1 AIN __,..---,--DtNOTES BLOCK RETA\N\N( !,\AP DENOTES M/\PLE TREE ' \ \ I \ 10 I PROPOSED BUILDING NORTH DETAIL I I I :ND TILITYPOLE lVERHEAD ELECTRIC WIRE ELEPHONE BOX ET IRON MONUMENT OUND IRON MONUMENT SCALE 1 INCH = 20 FEET I SETBACK-./ 10 t--BUJLDI : LIN£ I I 10 I I hereby certify that this plan or specification was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed land surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Dated this 5th day of August, 2003. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. • \. ,,------,_,-.- <J. Cs'(~ ll lLJ ~ \J .8 ,~ u, t \i) -j ~7 I I 7 L I f "i~ \Ll Q "~ ;; l fJ ~ l -~ =:J uj ill ll\ - 00~ a ll ~ & LCL ~~ C\ r w <;}_ m 8 \LJ 3 ~ =r::. 0 7_ D__ ~ ~; !1~ u:::: lLJ D iii e ii =3 uJ ~ ~ ID ~ ~ ! ! .,,, ~ t4\ ] ~ f-~ • ':; " r:;i_ \('\ Ci V) ~,; .~ •• ·• '/: r.;; :'i 11 f--. VJ <.,+ r • ' ;- ]_ () \-~ w _l uJ 2'-11" ~ ;' 1P ,- I 10-~· ·-~ ~11 13'-83111" ri 0 ~ I 0 10'◄1.e- 10'-31/2" - screell\.l!cl Porch -=n ~n"' '4oors. with ei-levro~ al".d gw.s.s. '-.... ab°"'' · "-.., ~, 1 !,, "' -.... 1.u ~ ~ ~ /4 ;t ~ :ll'-3:W- t:>ecR. ~ u ------------30"-1:114"-------------""1 MC!l,{YeeVv Ml,{YpVlyj ci Vvvl 15,yl,{e,e Meese ResLc{eVvce 3i35 Cfi1.SCO C,[ye,Le DYOM, MN 1/i:?' =i' O' lo i z ~ / -- Porch urqeMi.rror will. """fit ;~~• I /•~WwoLL ~ 3'·9"-' "' ~, owY1-trs SKLte ~ JI , ' -·-C<!UNii.sot ·.ld l, :,1 /S'O'h<r< t! l A □ :o 1 c=i~ I I, " I 7, LI 1711 ' ,;:::::: ~ 0 .;--~. 12'◄112" ~ ,_ Hu -1 ..,.__,__ ---GI y ;! Closet 12"--"' ~--l ::::::: !,::::::: OW"'-tr'S 'B.Atn 10 . ~ ~· ' "'~" ,w' • .,,,,-,-~-I k-3'-85, e-...:,; ,. -------0 ----- j i -(__ no i:;i;ith 1. :l)TI Ope"'-tO --f--' shelf '-J 'B-elow = C{_ - (7~ '<,--4'-8112" 0 '-~ 1A ,, ,~ ff-r~ ~ I 1 ? 1 Ope"'-to 'B.elow '□ , ~"\J[Gjg~ ;.~~ = ;=: : r=i~□ ~-,. Cj Ke5t 'B.CfrY\-1. ~~ ~ l1 ~ n ~ ,....., ~ ~ LJ ""'T' '--- MC! ureeV'v Muy-pl-1 k:j ci V'vd Bruce Meese ResLdeV'vce 3i35 C,{).S,CO C[rcLe DYOV\,O, MN 1/!?' = 1.' O' Shd.fwit!, e«b&for ~ow 1'co Above """- I I I I I •- I -I "' ::~----··-•_:,_:•:,:-._;c_•·/,:•,,•,.•,:<,.•.· ----·.•,:-._.-:·-·,:-· .. •,:-_:--~ --------::1 , I I I I j I storcige RoOV\,\. I > I storcige RoOV\,\. ! ·• L_ . V •. ,, %•c·•• .. ,,, :~:·:~: -~-.: .: -Jr Mciuyeettv Muy-pvitj ci ttvc{ "'fsyuce Meese Resfc{eVvee 31.35 C,~sc.o C,[v-cle DY'OVl-0, MN 1./f?• = 1.' o· H) '?DCOVci!i!f CULATION WORKf~-~ET (~t\l l?11 Gt SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE IE) 0-75' ' . 75-250' . -.J0-500' 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 = '?'v S.F. ft*i,tnu,~ X = 15 S.F. wa.. llS D. Sidewalk X = S.F. X -S.F. E. Patio/Deck X = ISL/ S.F. X = 22-b,26 S.F. F. Landscape X = S.F. Underlain X = S.F. By Plastic X = S.F. Or Fabric G. X = 2--0 l S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE -~ ':J4, 2,:::, S.F. · A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -415/'i_ S.F. B A lo34 .'2)? B L/15 L{ x 100 = 14 % 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. Drive,vay-X = :3£5 S.F. ·t tA tttr1tJ1~ X = )$ S.F. I ':i D. Sidewalk X = S.F. X = S.F. E.~eck X = S.F. X = 2;z_ b-'LS S.F. F. Landscape X = S.F. Underlain X = S.F. By Plastic X = S.F. Or Fabric G. Other X = S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE -7.,, 7 ~. '2 S S.F. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 1j/5 t'tl S.F. B A 1.14,'1-0 + B 4,G Jl/ X ]00 = 0,0 % 24 . ~ :~ .- \ \ \ ~ 0) -LiJ· : N :,t- 0) N 0 " z ,is· r:,f;,\?JA0~ + ~ 940.1 V FOIP 1 /2"0PEN 932.0 10 I ../',. (. ------- - ........ --10 11;'€. 951.6 0 -.::::. - 940.6 936.5 •935,2 ,;J ... c'f- 934. 931.3 -ORDINARY HIGH WAlER LINE 929 • AS LOCA 1ED JUNE 30, 200:S LAKE MINNETONKA /~~o-.sli> I I I I I I 952.1 ~ 3/4"0PEN - / .·, i _, !/!f!l/l!Pf'h'l/J,· --------------------------------- .. HA RD COVER CALCU~ORK. .. (:TTEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLI VE) 0-75' --250' . .J·0-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House-X = 570 S.F. Length WidJh 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 = 1-z...~ S.F. X = S.F. E. Patio/Deck ·x • <6'1 = S.F . X = S.F. F. Landscape X = ('.!:7~ lll S.F. Underlain X = S.F. By Plastic X = S.F. Or Fabric G .. .Other X = S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE -Z i 2.33 S.F. · A TOTAL PROPERIT AREA IN ZONE LD . S.r.3 S.F. B A 2 ., Z"33. B I0,....(73 X 100 = Z/J % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE r S.F. A. House X -Ll ~s ' 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 = /IS S.F. X = S.F. E. Patio/Deck X = 3~··· S.F. X = S.F. F. Landscape X =i?E:I~ LIL S.F. Underlain X = S.F. By Plastic X = S.F. Or Fabric G. Other X = S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE -z .3& S.F. A TOTAL PROPERIT AREA IN ZONE /Q.! .(73: S.F. B A ~Y..fi B 10, CZ3 X 100 = Z-2-1 { % 24 . }.~ ... - 1,;-ffiQ'ZO~ ~~ \ \ \ 1'5' ;]ffcf,Av~ I I \ \ \ \ 10 I ' I 964 . : -1- I _;__ --'"' --:-963 r--BUILDI ~, SETBACK--! : LINE , : I I I r,~~-111---j~ \ sr.r 951 .6 0 -.::::.. / -- -- ----- 11 r, 954.7 L ~ \j l~OPEN . I \... / I I . I HI ~DCOVER CALCULATION WO~ SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE 1.,,,,fE) 0-75' 75-250' ~.:,,J-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 1.,0 X ,. -i~ = 4'60 S.F. C. Driveway X = l Y'J I, 5" S.F. X = S.F. D. Sidewalk X = S.F. X = S.F. E. Patio/Deck X = t3~ S.F. X = S.F. F. Landscape X = S.F. Underlain X = S.F. By Plastic X = S.F. Or Fabric G. Other X = S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE -~EE:: ~(2.. \( b"( '2-1 l°l 4 · ? S.F. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -l,q_:305 S.F. B A B 0.305 X JOO = ?4,i % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X = S.F. Length Width X = S.F. X = S.F. X = S.F. ?,I IS" 3Z 713 B. Garage Z,5 X IZ.. = S.F. /~,, (;'"' IS- U"02•~.F . C. Driveway . ll 1 t-S X ?\a = 1£2,S X 32.. = 9'(.12.2= S.F. '1, c::; 2--D 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. Or Fabric G. Other X = S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE -1_,,,?;;3'2, £: S.F. A TCYI'AL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A 2 '7-P-/l : S: - B lo:PP) X JOO (a ":2Q '::::f S.F. --"'-0)..,,....fq--% = B 24 · 969.0 . .- LO LLI ~ O> N 0 r') z ~ 967. :io1NT Of BEGINNING -- '-Jw CORNER OF LOT 41 i5.0 \ \ 966.3 966.6 957.7 \ <D 01 ..... 964-j- l -:-963 SETBACK--! -- 968.2 \~ 'b . 'k-~J-·oo\. . <o ~ ~~ \. 6'.,,. 966-43/4 ER--ft)IP E'LY coRN ~S~OT 64 ~ --1\]1 Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik& Associates Engineers & Architects August 12 , 2003 Ms. Janice W aataja Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: 3135 Casco Circle File No. 139-03-000 Plat No . 0 3 -2936 D ear Janice: Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Jnc . is an and Employee Owned BxH11?rf H mative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer Principals: Otto G. Bonestroo, P.E. • Marvin L. Sorvala, P.E. • Glenn R. Cook, P.E .• Robert G. Schunicht P.E • Jerry A . Bourdon, P.E . • Mark A. Hanson, P.E . ' · · Senior Consultants: Robert W. Rose n e, P.E . • Joseph c. Anderlik, P.E. • Richard E. Turner, P.E .• Susan M . Eberlin, C.P.A . Associate Principals: Keith A . Gordon, P.E. • Robert R. Pfefferle, P.E .• Richard w. Foster, P.E .• David o . Loskota, P.E .• Michael T. Ra _utmann, P.E . • Ted K. Field, P.E . • Kenneth P. Anderson, P.E .• Mark R. Rolfs, P.E .• David A. Bonestroo, M.8.A .• Sidney P. W1ll1amson , P.E., LS. • Agnes M . Ring, M.8.A. • Allan Rick Schmidt, P.E . • Thomas W. Peterson, P.E. • James R. Maland, P.E. • Miles B. Jensen, P.E. • L. Phillip Gravel 111, P.E .• Danie) J. Edgerton, P.E .• Ismael Martinez P.E • Thomas A. Syfko, P.E. • Sheldon J. Johnson • Dale A. Grove, P.E. • Thomas A . Roushar, P.E .• Robert J. Deve ry, P:E. · · Offices: St. Paul , St. Cloud, Rochester and Willmar, MN • Milwaukee, W I • Chicago, IL Website: www.bonestroo.com We have reviewed the survey for the existing and proposed home construction at 313 5 Casco Circle. The plans propose to remove the existing home and construct a new home that conforms to side yard setback requirements. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: • The new home location will provide adequate room, particularly along the west side, to construct drainage swales to convey storm water southerly to the lake. The maple tree shown along the west side of the home may need to be removed to facilitate the swale construction. The existing grades shown suggest that the tree is currently helping to div ert some storm water westerly onto the neighbor's prope1ty . Swale construction will help in containing the storm water on the subject property . • If the property owners desire is to save the tree, the propo se d home could be located further north so the swale could be constructed between the new home and the tree. • Final plans should include existing and proposed contours extending at least 50-feet beyond the . subject property lot lines. Proposed grades should include drainage swales along the east and west lot lines . • Erosion control measures should be installed, inspected and approved b y the city prior to ariy work on site. If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863 . Yours very trul y, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg C c: Greg Gappa, C ity of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 651-636~4600 ■ Fax: 651-636-1311 RUN DATE: 7/I3/2003 38 2011723340007 PROP ADDR 313 I CASCO CIR OWNER NAME J P SUMNER & E K SUMNER TAXPAYER JOHN P SUMNER NAME/ADDR EILZABETH K SUMNER 3131 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 2011723430027 PROP ADDR 3155 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME BENJAMIN F ROBERTACCIO ET AL TAXPAYER BF&MKROBERTACCIO NAME/ADDR 3155 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 2011723430030 PROP ADDR 3133 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME G C BECKER/TI MARCHESSAULT TAXPAYER G C BECKER/T I MARCHESSAULT NAME/ADDR 3133 CASCO CIR ORONO MN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PAGE: ! PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 2011723340008 38 2011723340022 PROP ADDR 3129 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME JOANNE D JONES TAXPAYER JOANNE D JONES NAME/ADDR 5100FRANCEAVES#l04 EDINA MN 55410 38 2011723430028 PROP ADDR 3145 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME BC DOWNEY & BA DOWNEY TAXPAYER B C DOWNEY & B A DOWNEY NAME/ADDR 3145CASCOCIR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 2011723430031 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME THE CASCO CO TAXPAYER CITY OF ORONO PARKS NAME/ADDR PO BOX 66 CRYSTALBAYMN 55323 PROP ADDR 3127 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME KE AAKRE & J AAKRE TAXPAYER K E AAKRE & J AAKRE NAME/ ADDR 3127 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 2011723430029 PROP ADDR 3135 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME B F MEESE & M E MURPHY TAXPAYER MAUREEN MURPHY NAME/ADDR 3135 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARSTI-IlS DATEONTHE RECORDS OFTHE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTM~= BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. /7 /J ~J /)-:z._ . t (1 aZlufi DATE /·-/~t.L--BY -.L,. 00 I/ .~ N) 0- ~ cf\ C) ~ ;; ~ ---\ L LOT 150 SPRING PARK (31) -------------- August 6, 2003 Tom Kellogg Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. 2335 West Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 RE: 3135 Casco Circle -Rebuild Zoning File: 03-2936 Dear Tom: I've enclosed the survey, including topography, for the proposed house at 3135 Casco Circle. The applicants are proposing to rebuild the home and leave the existing garage. A lot width variance and possibly hardcover variances are required. Also, the applicants originally proposed to keep the eight foot west side setback in hopes of saving the significant tree and to control drainage. They felt that by leaving the foundation in tact in this corner that the tree would have a better chance for survival. They also claim that run-off down this side of the lot is controlled by the tree. Staff directed them to meet the 10 foot setback because a significant tree was not a solid hardship argument and that the project was a rebuild not remodel and therefore subject to current standards. Could you please comment on drainage on that side of the lot and whether removal of the tree (if needed) would result in drainage problems. Please forward your comments to me at your earliest convenience. The applicants wish to be placed on the August 18, 2003 Planning Commission agenda. Sincerely, City of Orono Janice Waataja City Planner / / / 1P£N .... ~ ~ / / ~ ~ .-)\"$' c:_i:..J r" \ \ "'I '--/ .._/ \ \ \ 957.7 tx ::, 0 :r ~J x 11 0 Lr L_ \ ~ 0) ..... N -w- ~ --d" 940.1 I I \ \ \ \ ~ FDIP 1 /2"0PEN 932.0 .~ I T I ---it: j-BUILDI § : LINE ;: I ..10 _;_ I 962.J 10 951.6 0 -......;;::._ 964-i_ I --:-963 SETBACK--! I 962--i~ 53':"4 ./ 965_ -- >, U' "--o 1l, ~ r'\ ~J.~ ~ ef> " '~ \1.:; l.t o..,.~ <?:J;.t?ooi ~~ \. MOST E.'L 'f c;NER __. 966.l Of LOT 64 fO\P r; (\ $ \/ ';-1-'\ \'-\ " 963.7 -- --------- gsg~OPEN - / ~ + r--. t") I I I 11 1"\ LI \.J ~ C'Q.) DENOTES Ul\\Jt'< POLE o\-\E. DENOlE.S oVERHE.f>.D ELE.C E.M O DENOTES TELEPHONE. BOX 0 DENOTES SEi \RON MONUl-. • DENOTES FOUND \RON MO~ DENOTES JUD\Clf>.L LANDtN @ c,::::,:::::co DENOTES souLDER RE.TM-l ____,.---OEN01"€S BLOCK REfAlNIN< MAP DENOTES Mf>.PLE TREE N0f2-TH E:.,,LCVATIOf-J 1/~' ~ l'-0" Sheet Number: GD of Sheet Title: Date: Scale: Project Mgr: Designer: Cf:,g2Jq&J 6UITIS Drawn By: MUR'PH'( ~IE-[S[ f<_E:Sl DEJ-lGE 3135' C/¥"cLC) Cl t2-, Df20l,~D; MtJ Revision Date Owners Approval: Date: 952-473-222 l Builders & Renovators of Fin.e Homes 420 East Rice Street • Wayzata, MN 55391 Fax 952 •473 .214 4 MN Lie ~20034536 ------·------··· . f---------:~~:::·:.:~::=-=====~-----·····-···-··,I~----_-_..,.~~----_-_-- A EAST SLE.,VATID~_j Sheet Number: of Sheet Title: Date: Scale: Project Mgr: Deslgner:CAp....j2-I c:JAb¼ ?;Ul2,.J'l<e'.2 Drawn By: MURF)H'( r1 LC:>E :S\ 36 Cl"<!:;::£0 01 Y-2, Or,zD\--~ 0 1 M ~ Revision Date Owners Approval: Date: 952-473-2221 Builders & Renouators of Fi.ne Homes 420 East Rice Street• Wayzata, MN 55391 fa,c 952-473-2144 MN Lie #20034536 @)· soun-1 ELEVATIOW 621240 Sheet Number: of Sheet Title: Date: Scale: Project Mgr: NURPl-11/ Mt~~~jc 31?1:3 {_~~">6112. Or20f-~J1 HN Revision Date Owners Approval: Date: 952-473·2221 Builders & Renouarors of Fin.e Homes 420 Ea.st Rice Street• Wayzata, MN 55391 Fax 952-473-2144 MN Lie #20034536 621240 ljf,c_,, 6 i'.i'. __ /\,_Yt:i_2~1J '18'::>.~'5 (i;, AV'l l"'!i>-!> A 01 '-·++- Sheet Number: of Sheet Title: Date: Scale: Project Mgr: MURPl-ff rlE1:~~)£ pes=-_:)1 C) E-l-k>E,, ~I~~ if::;:.-·{/.) Cl vr2:i? r--io 1 tvl H Revision Date Owners Approval: Date: 952-473-2221 Builders & Renovators of Fine Homes 420 East Rice Street• Wayzata, MN 55391 Fax952-473-2144 MN Lie #20034536 r : ~ ~1 11 1 "-.; 11---i ~ I Ii ~ I I I I " ~ ~ ;;, □ l ~ / ~ ' / . - t'OYC,Y\ ~ 2'· 13'-8" 25'-3318" I scyeev-ect Poye,n t:>ecR ~3•-0-1 ·~ ~ / ~ .... A I !I GGJf"~l I ! II II owv-er s s otLte .__.._ __ offi,ce.--~ u ~ II " II ;:. I ~,h .. I ~ II ~ CjYeAt II ~ ~ ; R.OOV\,\, r:,LvcLv,,g ~ II ~ II ~ -II ~ II .-- I [Q} --------o -------~ - ~ ---------=---J~~ I--1-- I ! ___ , ~ B ~ t'Avcrrt) □ i is-2'-10"-' [>o<J Jim-: -U!otMYt) [p ~ D ~ i;; I PowcteY ~ ~ Q ! 0 I ~ I LLbrnru 5vcrru I I u ~---- ' r ~-Mot!i R.OOV\,\, !"', I I / It. - / 1'-8" L,,.= ---·--·------~ :r 23'-8318" . k-----------38'-1314"------------'>I MciureeV\, Muv-pv-1tj ci V\,Ot 1srue,e Meese Re.sJoleV\,e,e Mciuv-eeV\, Muv-pv-1tj ciV\,ol Brue,e Meese ResLoleV\,e,e SE1Nc. 3i35 C-li!SC,O C,[ye,Le DYOV\,O, MN 1/$?' 1.' o· 3i35 C-li!SCO C,[ye,Le DYOV\,O, MN 1/$?'=1.• o· 420 EAST R.ICE STR.EET, WAYZATA, MN 55391 952-473-2221 WWW.STONEHOUSEDESIGNS.COM ST SE1Nc. 420 EAST RICE STREET, WAYZATA, MN 55391 952-473-2221 rn e.xercLse ROOM RtcrecltLOV\, ROOM stor-cige ROOM .,, .. ,-:-: -.. ----= -::-... -=-~ --------:, I I I I . I . I I F======i I I 0 I ~~j=::::!!:::::::=====tfij I ll= : I I I . I : I t:=:lt:c::::::::===~I I : I stornge ROOM I i I .· I > I I I _J : I . ;!J MlH,(YteV\,, Muv-plrltj Ci! V\,d lsrue,e Meese RtsLdeV\,,C,e 3135 C,ClSCO C,[ye,Le Oy-0111,0, MN 1/1?' = 1· o· WWW.STONEHOUSEDESIGNS.COM EixercLse ROOIM s -,r;' Is: I I h I I I I I I I I r:::::b, RecrecitLoi,,, ROOIM storcige R.OolM 0 Mecvicii,,,Lccil ROOIM storcige ROOIM ! w~ .. ~ ... :;: ~.~·11:;:·~dk·~~:~=·= ~•~n1 :;·, ·, < .: •' . '/,. , ... , ,,V;,'•·· < •' ·, y) ,·Yh';:•,\ .'c:;, v,::,,' •"·"'"'· ·•.:' <<··. •' ·./> y ,<;Y•,.L Mciuree~ Muy-pVILJ ci ~(;;{ rsruce Mees.e Res.[D{e~ce 31.35 e,cisco e,tv-cle ov-oV\,o, MN 1./l?' = 1.' O' ~ i,,---------------2T◄5/B"--------------..... 1~ ! 1-1-1-c 1111111 111-'-J_L_ ~ T I f--ON-- 2'~11•_,.~----10'◄·------ n ~ ----10'-<4118" •l2'<1U~ o ~~-fllf·-iq 1r#u L ~-,N,.,_ ,Pj_j 0 •------------l-*33111"-----------tl'-"i SCYeei-1,ect 'F'OYCV1 Decko ~ !o 1i ;! -=it r~----_-_-_-_-_ -- Jv<> 0 ---di ' [GGJf··=·· eM 7......, :---II , I , I ill,! I I n==:i I ~ ~-_JJ_~ □ ~ -_____________________ _ . ~ qellt RoOIM ~ ~ ~ [QJ is,-2'-10"-'> Un.., ~oors Wt.th chtvroi'\, t;tYw{ 9U\ss '-.__ "bove "-,..___ LLbYllYl::) ~ .. pi;ii-1,tyl::I ·~{> · <I r-'-it!2 E,v,,tyl::I J] U Muct RoOIM 0 L_JIR, ~"~~ r-- Gl Ill~ iF I ~ -il- L1 ... 9--~----23·-a------4i i<,--------------------39"·1314·-------------------- MciureeV\, Muy-pMyj Cl V\,vi "tsruce Meese R.es~vieV\,e,e 3i35 CCISCO C,[ycle OY0V\,0, MN i/1?' =1.• o· Ttll\. "Mtc~pu:tsh f... ../ l-<--f3'-9" -"I □ ] II 11 u ~ 'Porch UlrqeMLrror will""" fi.t ~~1.M~U Sndfwlth corbds for OWVl-tY-'S Su~te 1111-----wi...tow,,,.. I l r , f1 caU.~ t.s.&lt ;•·o•n,re A ,--------------v ◊ _[ ~ i! D -::--iii" -CJ 12'-4112" f-tey- ctoset - ~j tt-frll I opeV\, to .,f bFl ~~el~ow=!.b::==,c:;:::~ ~ ~ ,-;ect Y-V\,\, 1. 1-----□ ~ ~- I U---+--, ,:::=,._____,,,.,:::...._-----t--,_ □ m+--:~~:,r. 1---=:iJ..----- eiuest,-;clr-V\,\, Ill q 'L ILJ 'r L_, MciureeV\, Muv-pVl~ ci V\,c:{ B>rue,e Meese Res.tc:{eV\,e,e 3i35 CCI.Seo clvcLe OYOV\,O, MN 1./l?' = 1.' o· ---------.- CASCO POINT OT 6 l O 1 ,'. . SPRING PARK (31) ,-. , . . . . : ~. • \ __ I ----------------------------------------------------------------,/ -------------------------------------------- GOVT LOT 6 @ / / ' I\. I , I < . I l \ l CITY OF ORONO -VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee ,mQ,J}{> ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures ($250.0()) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Application # CP Date Received 7-c9 ~-0 3. Amount Paid -600 , o 0 Site Address .3/ 3 ~ Co., $c o C Ir c I~ Oro,-. o <;;<;;'31 / Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ..;2 o -)I rJ.-ols -'-/3 ·-DD;l°I Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired ~ h :2 I , .;?CV-62. (month/year) I (do)~ also own the adjacen( parcels of land. Present use of property: ~residential __ other (specify) _________ _ Zoning District: __________________________ _ APPLICANT . Phone (home) C/9 -3/rJ/~ /;)7'7 Name Brqc-e-/Jfc-c,;,..e..-9-: 2?tf!:litr€e.,...,. p1,:.4r~tPhone (work) ta-7ctet~73<./0 Ill" Address: 3,/ 3S: CA.xt, C, rck City:~ ('.) tD 11 o Zip: S:-S:.sv OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Brt:1ce. /1le-es;·,e.. 'i--/l&..tAree..,... /J1u,-fAc3i Phone (home) '[<; ;J 4(7/ /J& Phone (work) fu/2 799 "7]i/o or 7 3 Address: 313 < C4 x=a Circ/<f-ity: UGl'lO Zip: s-::s;::.3 91 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: €Se Estimated Construction Cost $ 8 oo, Co<> (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___x_ Lot Width Hardcover Front Side Rear __ Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore __ Other (specify) _______________________ _ HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficul preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:_~1.£...~_.Q;,L_~~~~-J-------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) 1 REQUIRED SUBMITT ALS All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. ✓ ,t,// v/ ,/ ,/ Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-5910). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8½" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey ( existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8½" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8½" x 11 "). 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). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct t~ best of his/her knowledge. ?Y~ Applicant's Signature '-, ~ Date ,Z·-// ~ C> .S ~,~~e ~ OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of in':;! 0 ation and verification of this request. Owner's Signature -·-;;7"'------::::--=-=------,,,,,,..,,,-.-----7±---Date 7-- ~~~ 7-L-G/t,;P'---<-J, Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 7 LOT 150 SPRING PARK (31) RUN DATE: 7/'13/2003 38 2011723340007 PROPADDR 3131 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME JP SUMNER & EK SUMNER TAXPAYER JOHN P SUMNER NAME/ADDR EILZABETH K SUMNER 3131 CASCO CIR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 2011723430027 PROPADDR 3155 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME BENJAMIN F ROBERTACCIO ET AL TAXPAYER BF & MK ROBERTACCIO NAME/ADDR 3155 CASCO CIR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 2011723430030 PROPADDR 3133 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME G C BECKER/TI MARCHESSAULT TAXPAYER G C BECKER/T I MARCHESSAULT NAME/ADDR 3133 CASCO CIR ORONO MN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 2011723340008 38 2011723340022 PROPADDR 3129 CASCO CIR PROPADDR 3127 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME JOANNE D JONES OWNER NAME KE AAKRE & J AAKRE TAXPAYER JOANNE D JONES TAXPAYER K E AAKRE & J AAKRE NAME/ADDR 5100 FRANCE AVES #104 NAME/ADDR 3127 CASCO CIR EDINA MN 55410 WAYZATAMN 55391 38 2011723430028 38 2011723430029 PROPADDR 3145 CASCO CIR PROPADDR 3135 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME BC DOWNEY & BA DOWNEY OWNER NAME B F MEESE & M E MURPHY TAXPAYER BC DOWNEY & BA DOWNEY TAXPAYER MAUREEN MURPHY NAME/ADDR 3145 CASCO CIR NAME/ADDR 3135 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 2011723430031 PROPADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME THE CASCO CO TAXPAYER CITY OF ORONO PARKS NAME/ADDR PO BOX66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPAR1M~ TIIE BEST OF MY KNOWLEOOE AND BELIEF. /J /J ,I /\':2.. . t (1 adu/i DATE /·-;,:t:..::.:.,.,By .L ,,; U0 y= PAGE: 1 '~ N) CJ ~ cf\ C) OSTVIG TREE INC. July 10, 2003 3135 Casco Point Circle Dear City Council: SUITE 200 1421 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD WAYZATA, MN 55391 I'm weighing in on whether Bruce Meese's Sugar Maple tree is in danger of stress, decline, or even death do to the house demolition. I believe that removing the southwest wall of the foundation most likely would kill the tree or within three years after construction. Large Sugar Maples generally do not adapt well to soil changes, stress, or root damage. Replacing the southwest wall would require according to my friends in the construction business "digging a moat'' safe enough for workers to work in without the soil collapsing in on them. This would ultimately be a problem for one of the largest Sugar Maple trunk diameters I ever seen in my twelve years as an arborist. Sincerely, WtvJ~ Scott Lejonvam Consulting Arborist ~--r,r ~ ,,_;;/ ~ ~ I ~ I U'/4 ,¾L-~ "'" .,,,,,,~ ~ r 3/ 2 > ~~/ {/~ ~~ c:;>~1'/ ~,£~ fc/ ~ ~ _,c=✓ ~ rY ~ .,,4;r ,,,_;,,_ ~ ~ ~/ ~_,-,,~. /4 Le.. #'~~ ~ 7~ n-7 /44J~ ~ ---~ z; ~ ~~ ~. ?~/ -~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ c.· . ,'r,rT~ r ~ ~~-/ ~r~ c~ %r-fi.ee 4 ~re-/~ ~,._e_ ~~ ~/ ~ o, ~ ~d~- (. "~~ -~~ 4-1G-4 _/4, ~~ ~ ~ ~~1~-_/1 £. ~ .;:;7v<{ ~~i c,_,/ ~ ~,.__,_ (} /~~✓~~/~~ .. c~~ .,4 ~~7'~- ~7--/""7"f"7~-a~ ~ ~~ ;,.,-.4,p.-,,. e~ ...4c..-,,,,-,,,_,__ Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form ·.:> d \\ ::> ( I (we) _):k..a;..! =·-"' .... 1:J:+·-",f-1 ~Ll=' ~v=·L.-)~(\~~-'-,'-·· ---of :> 11-t s-· .61 S ((I f [print name(s)] I [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at -3 \ :::>) {" (a<;t::J C~ ( (j -'<!.. also referred to as Land Use Application No. ____ . I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. ****************************************************************************** I (we) .. r(';;,'.;:il.::~\\ /JI c,,J'\.e(S,t-,u.l l_l_ • [print name(s)] of 31 3 ~ Cc..__( co C: I ,kl-e [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at ~3 ,,) -;-(1v1\C,) (",< also referred to as Land Use Application No. ____ . I (\ve) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council <!,Pproval. Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. HA..a:illCOVER CALCULATION WOR.n...SHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 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 S.F. S.F. E. Patio/Deck ' 0~ S.F. S.F. F. Landscape S.F. X 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 % 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 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 % 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. First Address Urof'?o City ' Middle I understand . · tjghts as stated above. A(~:Z: - Signature Last ss3r1 (9~~2Lf7/-/;;:r7 State Zip Phone Sec.13.04 RIGHTS OF SUBJECTS OF DATA Subdivision 1. Type of data. The rights of individual on whom the data is stored or to be stored shall be as set forth in this section. Subd. 2. Information required to be given individual. An individual asked to supply private or confidential data concerning himself shall be informed of: (a) the purpose and intended use of the requested data within the collecting state agency, political subdivision, or statewide system; (b) whether he may refuse or is legally required to supply the requested data; ( c) any known consequence arising from his supplying or refusing to supply private or confidential data; and ( d) the identity of other persons or entities authorized by state or federal law to receive the data. This requirement shall not apply when an individual is asked to supply investigative data, pursuant to section 13.82, subdivision 5, to a law enforcement officer. The commissioner of revenue may place the notice required under this subdivision in the individual income tax or property tax refund instructions instead of on those forms. Subd. 3. Access to data by individual. Upon request to a responsible authority, an individual shall be informed whether he is the subject of stored data on individuals, and whether it is classified as public, private or confidential. Upon his further request, an individual who is the subject of stored private or public data on individuals shall be shown the data without any charge to him and, if he desires, shall be informed of the content and meaning of that data. After an individual has been shown the private data and informed of its meaning, the data need not be disclosed to him for six months thereafter unless a dispute or action pursuant to this section is pending or additional data on the individual has been collected or created. The responsible authority shall provide copies of the private or public data upon request by the individual subject of the data. The responsible authority may require the requesting person to pay the actual costs of making, certifying, and compiling the copies. The responsible authority shall comply immediately, if possible, with any request made pursuant to this subdivision, or within five days of the date of the request, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, if immediate compliance is not possible. If he cannot comply with the request within that time, he shall so inform the individual, and may have an additional five days within which to comply with the request, excluding ·Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays. Subd. 4. Procedure when data is not accurate or complete. An individual may contest the accuracy or completeness of public or private data concerning himself. To exercise this right, an individual shall notify in writing the responsible authority describing the nature of the disagreement. The responsible authority shall within 30 days either: (a) correct the data found to be inaccurate or incomplete and attempt to notify past recipients of inaccurate or incomplete 10 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 #03-2936, as mailed to the attached list of property owners. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set z:ust, 2003. 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 Monday, August 18, 2003, beginning at 6:00 p.m. on the matter of reviewing the following land use applications: 1. #03-2914 2. #03-2917 3. #03-2923 #03-2925 5. #03-2927 6. #03-2928 7. #03-2929 8. #03-2930 Julie Whittington, 1981 Fagerness Point Road, LR-IC zoning district, requests a Conditional Use Permit and variance for construction of retaining walls and walkways within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka constituting hardcover where hardcover is normally not allowed. Winfield and Nancy Stephens, 350 Crestview Avenue, LR-IA zoning district, request a variance to permit additions to the existing residence constituting additional structure within 75' of Stubbs Bay Creek where structure or hardcover are normally not allowed; constituting hardcover within the 75'-250' zone in excess of the 25% normally allowed; requesting a front setback of 30' where a 50' front setback is normally required, a side setback of 1 O' where a 30' setback is normally required, and a rear setback of36' where a 50' setback is normally required. Stevan Wagner, 3607 Shoreline Drive, B-1 zoning district, requests a variance to permit re-use of an existing sign post located less than 1 O' from the street lot line. Ron Lauer of Lauer Homes on behalf of Kris Scherer, 90 Ferndale Green, RR-lB zoning district, requests an after-the-fact variance for location of a principal structure addition less than the required 10' setback from an accessory structure. James and Linda Martinson, 1435 Park Drive, LR-lB zoning district, request a variance to allow construction of a new residence on a lot 105' in width where 140' is required. Michael R. Mischke, 1972 Shadywood Road, LR-IC zoning district, requests hardcover, side setback and rear yard setback variances for construction of an attached 2-stall garage and additional living space. Jeff Martineau, 2565 North Shore Drive, LR-IA zoning district, requests a Conditional Use Permit for plumbing in an accessory building. Streeter & Associates on behalf of Richard and Deloris Little, 2775 Shadywood Road, LR-lB zoning district, requests a hardcover variance in order to construct a 22' x 24' attached 2-stall garage. 9 . #03-2931 10 . #03-2932 11. #03-2933 12. #03-2934 13 . #03-2935 14 . #03 -2936 Timothy and Kristi Osterberg, 1045 Loma Linda Avenue, LR-IB zoning district, request a street yard setback variance to allow a setback of28' where 3 5' is required for the reconstruction of a 2 stall garage . Michael Hayes of Michael Hayes Homes on behalf of Alfred Trapenese, 3220 Bohns Point Lane, LR-IB zoning district, requests side yard setback to allow a setback of 20' where 35' is required and a conditional use permit to place a detached garage on a through lot. Gary Nece on behalf of Robert and Brenda MacDonald, 2480 Old Beach Road, LR-lB zoning district, requests a hardcover variance for renovations to the existing home, including a new detached garage; and requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow plumbing in an accessory building. Jason Bliss, owner of 3445 Crystal Bay Road, LR-IC zoning district, requests variances to lot area, lot width, structure setbacks , and hardcover to allow construction of a new residence on the property. Scott and Kara Hutton, 1835 Shadywood Road, LR-IC zoning district, request a hardcover variance to construct a 10' x 12' shed in the 0-75' shoreline setback, replace an existing deck and add a stairway. Bruce Meese and Maureen Murphy, 3135 Casco Circle, LR-IC zoning district, request a side setback variance to allow a setback of 8' where 10' is required, for renovations/additions including a 2nd story to an existing home. All persons wishing to be heard are encouraged to attend this meeting. Written comments are accepted and should be submitted to the City of Orono by August 11, 2003 . Plans are available for review in the City Offices. For an appointment, please call (952) 249-4600. City of Orono By: Planning Co~~on ~ ~ /7/¥0- Mike Gaffron, Pla_!Ylin_-g Director To be published the week of August 2, 2003 Posted at: Orono City Offices Crystal Bay Post Office Long Lake Post Office Navarre Post Office 2 RUN DA TE: 7/23/2003 38 2011723340007 PROP ADDR 3131 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME J P SUMNER & E K SUMNER TAXPAYER JOHN P SUMNER NAME/ADDR EILZABETH K SUMNER 3131 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 2011723430027 PROP ADDR 3155 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME BENJAMIN F ROBERTACCIO ET AL TAXPAYER BF&MKROBERTACCIO NAME/ADDR 3155 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 2011723430030 PROP ADDR 3133 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME G C BECKER/TI MARCHESSAULT TAXPAYER G C BECKER/T I MARCHESSAULT NAME/ADDR 3133 CASCO CIR ORONO MN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PAGE: I PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 2011723340008 38 2011723340022 PROP ADDR 3129 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME JOANNE D JONES TAXPAYER JOANNE D JONES NAME/ADDR 5100FRANCEAVES#I04 EDINA MN 55410 38 2011723430028 PROP ADDR 3145 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME BC DOWNEY & BA DOWNEY TAXPAYER B C DOWNEY & B A DOWNEY NAME/ADDR 3145 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 2011723430031 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME THE CASCO CO TAXPAYER CITY OF ORONO PARKS NAME/ADDR PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 PROP ADDR 3127 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME KE AAKRE & J AAKRE TAXPAYER KE AAKRE & J AAKRE NAME/ADDR 3127 CASCO CIR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 2011723430029 PROP ADDR 3135 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME BF MEESE & M E MURPHY TAXPAYER MAUREEN MURPHY NAME/ADDR 3135 CASCO CIR WAYZATAMN 55391 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATEONTHE RECORDS OFTHE HENNEPIN COUNTI TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTM~: BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. /J /J J /'\-:Z ~ (1 ~ DATE /·-✓r-LL-,BY 00 I/ -~ C\() 0- ~ ~ u . CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 .. ~ J?hone (952) 249-4600 :. ,: .r~~ (952) 249-4616 ~ · The Planning Commission will hold public hearings in the Orono Council Chambers· at 2780 Kelley Parkway on Monday, August 18, 2003, beginning at 6:00 p.m. on the matter of reviewing the following land use applications: 1. #03-2914 Julie Whittington, 1981 Fagerness Point Road, LR-1C zoning district, requests a Conditional Use Permit and variance for construction of retaining walls and walkways within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka constituting hardcover where hardcover is normally not allowed . '" 2 .' #03'-2917 Winfield and Nancy Stephens, 350 Crestview Avenue, LR- 1 A zoning district, request a variance to permit additions to the existing residence constituting ·additional structure within 75' of Stubbs Bay Creek where structure or hardcover .are normally not allowed; con- stitutin!j°"hardcover within the 75'-250' zone ih ' excess of the 25% normally allowed; requesting a front setback of 30' where a 50' front setback is normally required, a side setback of 1 0' where a 30' setback is :normally required , and a rear setback of .36' wl)ere a 50' setback is nor- mally requ!red. 3 . #03-2923 Stevan Wagner, 3607 Shoreline Drive, 8-1 zoning district, requests a variance to permit re-use of an existing sign post located less than 1 0' from the street lot line. 4. #03-2925 Ron Lauer of Lauer Homes on behalf of Kris Scherer, 90 Ferndale f;,reen , RR-18 zoning district, requests·. ·an after-the-fact variance for location of a principal structure addition less than the required 1 O' setback from an accessory structure . , 5. •. #03-2927 James and Linda Martinson, 1435 Park Drive, LR-18 zon- ing district, request a variance to allow construction of a new residence on a lot 105' in width where 140' is required. 6 . #03 -2928 Michael R. Mischke , 1972 . Shadywood Road, LR-1 C zoning diEtrict, requests hardcover, side setback and rear yard setback variances for con- struction of an attached 2-stall garage and additional living space . . 7. #03-2929 Jeff Martineau , 2565 North Shore Drive, LR-1 A zoning district, requests a Conditional Use Permit for plumbing in an accessory building. , ... :.... - 8. #03-2930 Streeter & Associates on behalf of Richard · and Deloris Little, 2775 Shadywood Road, LR-18 zoning district, requests a har9cover _variance in order to construct a 22'. x 24 ' attached 2-stall garage . 9 . #03-2931 Timothy and Kristi , Osterberg , 1045 Loma Linda Avenue, •. ! LR-1 B zoning district, request a· street yard setback variance to allow a setback of 28 ' where 35 ' is required for the reci:>n e~ struction of a 2 stall garage .- ' 10. #03-2932 Michael Hayes of 1 Michael Hayes Homes on behalf of Alfred : : Trapenese, 322o ·sohns Point Lane, LR-: I 1 B zoning district, requests side yard set-1 \ back to allow a setback of 20 ' where 35' is : required and a conditional use permit to : ! place a detached garage on a through lotJ I 11. #03-2933 Gary Nece on beMalf ~~ I Robert and Brenda MacDonald, 2480 Qld! Beach Road, LR-18 zonin_g · dis_trict:• requests a hardcover vari.ance for renova-! lions to the existing home , including a n7w: detached garage; and requests.,_0 a,,, Conditional Use Permit to allow plumbing :! in an accessory building. ·,. · : t•,:i ! ", ?; , : · · ·· .. _: -~_;k:. \-I~~!· 12 . #03-2934 Jason Bliss; owner of" : 3445 Crystal Bay Road , LR-1 C zoning! district, requests variances to lot area, ,lo}> width , structure setbacks, and hardcover.: to allow constructior) of ·a new residenc;:e:; on the property. · . ;.;, .. _,. 13 . #03-2935 Scott and Kara Hutton~· 1835 Shadywood Road, LR-1 C zoning~ district, request a hardcover variance to ,. construct a 1 0' x -12' shed in the 0-75 (·.: shoreline setback , replace an exisiing:: deck and add a stairway. : ~-: · .. •,; 14. 1103-2936 Bruce Meese arid-~ Mauree n Mu rphy, 3135 Casco Circle/: LR-1C zoning district, request a side ·set;: back variance · to allow ·a setback of 8' '. where 1 0' is required , _lei:'; renovations/additions including a 2nd-·,• story to an existing home . · ··• :, ;~'.1 All persons wishing to be heard are ,j encouraged to attend this meeting. · Written comments are accepted and s~ould be submitted to the City of Orono . . by August 11 , 2003 . Plans are available , for review in the City Offices. For an · appointment, please call (952) 249-4600. : City of Orono By: Planning Commission Mike Gaffron, Planning Director (Published in The Laker and Pioneer Aug . 2, 2003) Affidavit of Publication State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin. Bill Holm, being duly sworn on oath, says that he is an authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as THE LAKER, Mound, Minnesota, and has full knowledge of the facts which are stated below: A.) The newspaper has complied with all the requirements constituting qualifications as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331 A.02, 331 A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. B.) The printed Land Use Applications which is attached was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published once each week for 1 successive weeks. It was first published Saturday the ---1...._ day of __ A_u_g..._u_s_t~--2003, and was thereafter printed and published every Saturday, to and including Saturday, the __ day of _______ 2003; 7 Authorized Agen t Suscribed and sworn to me on this ~ ~-t-~~~'--""-=-)us-=--t _, 2003. Notary Public KRISTI HOLM (1) Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space : $15.50 per inch. (2) Maximum rate allowed by law for above matter: $15 .50. (3) Rate actually charged for above matter: $7 .96 per inch . Each additional successive week : $5.79. CITY of ORONO July 29, 2003 Stonehouse Designs Carrigan Curtis 420 East Rice Street Wayzata, MN 55391 Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION SUBJECT: Zoning Application #03-2936 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 The Ci1:'J of Orono is required to notify you within fifteen (15) business days as to the status of your application for a side yard setback variance for property located at 3135 Casco Circle. Below is a list of items the City of Orono is requesting to complete our review: • Detailed floor plans/elevations/as-builts indicating what parts of the existing house will remain and what will be new construction to verify whether the project will be reviewed as a renovation or rebuild. • If the project is a rebuild, a new survey must be submitted showing the home meeting the 1 O' side yard setback requirement. With this scenario the only variance that would be required would be the lot width variance. • All existing and proposed hardcover shall be calculated on the hardcover worksheets that are enclosed. The hardcover calculations must be completed by your surveyor. • A topographic survey showing existing and proposed grades may be required at a later date should the City Engineer request it. Application #03-2936 is incomplete. If you wish to proceed with your application please submit the items requested above by August 6, 2003 to remain on the August 18, 2003 Planning Commission agenda. Please call me at (952) 249-4623 should you have any questions. Sincerely, City of Orono ~Wada· Janice Waataja i.r- City Planner cc. Bruce Meese & Maureen Murphy, owners Gary R. Germond, Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. Telephone (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 www.ci.orono.mn.us TRACKING SHEET FILE NO. 03-2936 Staff: J rJ./tllJL SITE ADDRESS: 3135 Casco Circle Applicant: Bruce Meese Address: 3135 Casco Circle Wayzata, MN 55391 Owner: Bruce Meese & Maureen Murphy Address: 3135 Casco Circle Wayzata, MN 55391 □ Application Completed Date: ________ 60 Day: ______ _ ~ Incomplete Notice Sent Date: _______ _ C~of Application Sent to: __ Engineer _ County DNR MCWD LMCD ~ Property Owners Notified: Date: _______ _ CY Legal Notice Published Date: _______ _ Jr ~ PC Meeting(s): -------'--'--------Vote: ___ Cf_-_/_-___:_ _ _/'.,,.L,.,,s-- Vote: --------------------- Vote: --------------------- Notice of PC Action: -----'------------------ D Resolution: