HomeMy WebLinkAboutProject Packett\
.,I\ ·,/ ;
"••· . '" .-•-··--•""-··--·-
~•_r ,: >
----~ -----·
;;i'=O''
I I
: I
······••»~ ·····-•-···••»•·· ..... ... -··--·------------
.._
1-
!t~
-..;
::::::;::: ,.,
1
--------
[""""'. ~..::11
OJ
L.:=1,
tf)
C"" < ~s
0 z
UJ
LL! :r:
00
... --·-.. .. .. . .. ··-------------1,--..--~~--~-------~-----'
I
;hi; I
'' I I'
ii;'
'II'
! / I
Cit. T--24~:19'::Jb
E-<H3Tt:·~~c sut ct.a \.St·V1i~.;..;: ------=-"'
,,1~ $1J\0}
l ..•
\
I
l
16'-•()" t·------. --------------··--. -·
i:
i I
I;
'' I'
Ii
I
f~~--~>i r(JtJl'W~
FO'.Jfa) CCV~ 11:
)if
L (-~W ,,~ Sb/\1;; ~7
,/
J;:"'"-p
I' ;;;;; '
11 ·--= ---~ ----------· ---
r·.uc::
[
\
IVIINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
. MEETING HELD ON SEPTEl\IBER 9, 1996
(#6) #2160 DAVID DOTZENROTH, 3225 CASCO CIRCLE -VARIANCES -
RESOLUTION #3758
The applicant was present.
Gaffron reported that the property in question is located in the Casco Point area but
presents no hardcover problems . The issues involve setbacks . The proposal calls for an
addition to the detached garage of 16'x24', resulting in an accessory structure in excess of
1000 s.f Gaffron said an addition of 15-l/2'x24' would maintain it below 1000 s.f The
setbacks for side and street would then be 15' with the garage doors to the side . The
doors currently face the street and are located .2' from the street .
Gaffron reported the Planning Commission had no problem with the addition itself
(noting t~~ 13% hardcover in the 75-250' zone) nor the change to the pitch of the roof.
The Commission did recommend that the garage doors be relocated to the east side and a
redevelopment of the driveway also be to the side of the garage . The recommendation
calls for the removal of the two doors facing the street and the concrete slab in the right
of-way.
Gaffron said the applicant is concerned with loss of a large maple tree by harming the
root system with the driveway relocation change recommended . The driveway change
would also likely require removal of some trees . Gaffron also noted that the overhang as
proposed would encroach into the right-of-way . Staff suggested a redesigning to
eliminate this problem. The application calls for variances to the side setback and street
setback .
Jabbour inquired about the location of the black walnut trees on the property, which was
noted . Callahan asked if the trees w ere discussed by the Planning Commission .
Dotzenroth said the trees were not discussed at length . He said the Commission noted a
concern with the impact on traffic due to the location of the doors to the street side .
Dotzenroth said his home is located at the end of Casco Point and the amount of traffic is
low by the time it reaches his property . He also noted the neighboring garages located
with virtually no street setback . Dotzenroth said he was concerned with adding
hardcover on the property by the recommended change in driveway and garage door
location . The cement slab located on the street side of the garage is now used for guest
parking and eliminates the need to park cars in the adjacent park area. Dotzenroth
personally parks on the east side of the garage now .
4
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
l\'IEETIL~G HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9, 1996
(#6 -#2160 David Dotzenroth -Continued)
Kelley asked several questions regarding the number of garage doors, frost footings, and
wall conditions of the garage. He said he was alluding to a possible rebuilding of the
garage and questioned whether the garage should be moved to a better location on the lot
if this was the case. Dotzenroth said he had no intention of taking the garage down and
rebuilding it. It was his belief that the foundation was sound. He did note that additional
support might be needed if a bigger garage door was used. Dotzenroth reported that the
change to the roof pitch was to maintain the same architectural design of the Victorian
style house.
There were no public comments.
Jabbour said he agreed with the applicant's viewpoint in keeping vehicles away from the
park area.' He did believe the garage should be maintained below the 1000 s.f limit.
Jabbour said he too was sensitive to the hardcover issue and did not want trees to be lost.
Although the cement apron is on the right-of-way, Jabbour did not see the justification in
adding the new driveway which would cause the increase in hardcover.
Goetten said she was concerned with safety on Casco Point but with the amount of
additional concrete required by the change in the driveway and the location of the
property on Casco Point, the issue did not seem quite so relevant. Goetten asked how
the addition would be accessed. Dotzenroth noted that the garage would be used in a
tandem manner.
Goetten inquired about the time frame of the work being completed on the house and the
new addition construction. Dotzenroth said the home remodeling was close to being
completed.
Jabbour was informed that the home had a full basement.
Goetten noted receipt of a call from a neighbor, Mary Butler, who voiced her support of
the proposal.
Callahan asked why the Planning Commission tied the completion of the home
remodeling to the garage addition. Dotzenroth noted that the Commission did not want
to see two projects going at one time and informed Callahan that the home would be
completed by October 31, 1996.
Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to approve the garage addition as proposed by the
applicant with the size of the garage remaining within the 1000 s.f limitation. The
cantilevered roof is not to exceed the lot line and must remain out of the right-of-way.
The doors will be allowed on the street side. This approval was based on the hardships
noted, the concern for additional hardcover, and the location of the trees.
5
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
:MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 9, 1996
(#6 -#2160 David Dotzenroth -Continued)
Kelley was concerned with what would occur if the garage was found needing total
rebuilding. Jabbour said if walls have to be removed, the application would have to come
back before the Council. Gaffron said if the garage has to be rebuilt, the application
would come back before the Council. Kelley said he wanted the applicants to understand
and the building inspector aware of possible problems. Gaffron clarified that the garage
must be within the I 000 s.f. size limitation, conditions #3 and 4 were eliminated.
Condition #5 requiring the completion of the house was to continue. Also, Finding #6
was added noting the difference of opinion between the Council and Planning
Commission was due to the concern for the trees and need for additional concrete adding
to hardcover, and the similarity between garages in the neighborhood. Callahan
commented that the similarity issue would not be valid as improvements have to begin
somewher,e. Jabbour asked why the push to finish the house was requested when no
neighbors have complained. Gaffron said the building permit allows for one year to finish
the exterior work on project. Goetten said the concern was beginning another project
when one was already begun. Dotzenroth noted a problem with a contractor setting the
remodeling back in time.
Vote: Ayes 3, Nays I, Callahan. Motion carried.
(#7) #2161 JAMES AND MELISSA EASLEY, 4105 HIGHWOOD ROAD -
VARIANCES -RESOLUTION #3759
The applicants were present.
Gaffron reported that the property consists of a 40' wide lot, 8500 s.f. in area, with an
existing house located mainly in the 0-75' setback with a detached garage located near the
street and side lot line in poor condition. The parking area is gravel. A sidewalk and
retaining wall also exist on the property.
Gaffron informed the Council that it was the applicant's intention to tear down the garage
and build a new detached garage within 3' of the side lot line and 25-30' from the street.
The doors would be located to the street side with parking in front. An enclosed
stairway is proposed for the 2-story garage with a basement resulting in three levels. A
future concept of the attachment of the garage to a new house located out of the 0-75'
setback was also noted.
6
CITY OF ORONO
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
473-7357
TO: David & Jennifer Dotzenroth
3225 Casco Circle
Wayzata, MN 55391
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance
DATE OF MEETING: 9/9/96
COUNCIL ACTION -MOTION:
APPLICATION NO. 2160
NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION
Date of Notice: September 13, 1996
COPIES:
VOTE: 3 FOR 1 AGAINST
To approve per the findings and conditions of the resolution previously mailed to you except that
the existing stall doors facing the street, and the existing concrete apron, will not have to be
removed. The resolution has been revised accordingly, and a copy of the revised resolution is
attached.
Please arrange to sign the 3 original resolution copies at the City Offices (Monday through Friday,
8:00 to 4:30). All persons with an interest in the property must sign the resolutions.
You must apply for and obtain a building permit prior to commencement of construction. (The
building permit application is a separate application from the zoning variance or conditional use
application.)
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. Permit application must be submitted no later
than September 9, 1997.
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.
ch
A RESOLUTION GRANTING
VARIANCES TO
MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9(D),
SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9(E), AND
SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6(B)
FILE #2160
WHEREAS, David A. Dotzenroth (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the
property located at 3225 Casco Circle within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally
described as follows:
Exhibit A attached (hereinafter "the property"); and
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal
Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(D) to allow the existing detached garage plus the
proposed additions to be located 0.2' from the street lot line where a 10' street setback would
normally be required, and a variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(E) to allow the proposed
1,000 s.f. footprint building to be located at setbacks ranging from 0.2' to 9.3' from lot lines
where a 15' setback from any lot line is required, and a variance to Section 10.25, Subdivision
6(B) to allow a side setback less than the required 10' for accessory structures in the LR-1 C
zone.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono,
Minnesota:
FINDINGS
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2160.
2. The property is located in the LR-IC, .Single Family Lakeshore Residential
Zoning District.
Page 1 of 7
3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 19, 1996,
and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon and subject to
the following findings and conditions:
A. The existing garage is located as near as O .2' to the street lot line and
4.4' to the side lot line. The proposed addition to the rear of the garage
will range from 7.4' to 9.3' from the side lot line.
B. Applicant further proposes to reconstruct and construct a new roof over
the existing garage and proposed addition, such new roof being steeper
in pitch than the existing roof, and portions of it constituting new
structure in locations not meeting the required setbacks from the street
and side property boundaries.
C. The existing garage doors open toward the street, making the existing
garage nonconforming because a garage with doors facing the street is
required by code to be setback 30' from the street lot line.
D. It would be inappropriate to construct the magnitude of additions
proposed while continuing the direct access to the street (Casco Circle),
which currently forces parking to occur within the street right-of-way
where such parking is generally discouraged or disallowed by Municipal
Zoning Code Sections 8.20 and 10.61, Subdivisions 4 and 5.
E. Applicant has agreed to eliminate the garage stall doors facing the street
and has agreed to place such doors on the east side of the
existing/proposed garage structure, and to develop a driveway apron
within the property boundaries to accommodate maneuvering and parking
outside of the right-of-way.
F. The proposed addition located as near as 7.4' from the side lot line will
have no significant impact on neighboring property or on the
neighborhood. Raising the pitch of the roof over the existing/proposed
garage located only 0.2' from the street lot line and as near as 4.4' from
the side lot line, will have no negative impact on the neighboring
Page 2 of 7
property owner or the neighborhood, since there are other similarly
situated detached garages in the neighborhood.
G. Planning Commission finds that the reconfiguration of the garage stalls
to enter the east side of the garage, and the concurrent construction of a
new driveway/parking area to the east of the garage structure, will have
minimal hardcover impact and will not cause a nonconforming hardcover
problem, but will result in hardcover in the 75-250' zone at a level less
than 20%, where 25% hardcover would be allowable.
H. Planning Commission recommends that further parking within the right
of-way be discouraged by requiring that the applicant remove the existing
concrete apron located within the right-of-way of Casco Circle.
4. The City Council finds that there are a number of justifications for allowing the
applicant to retain the existing stall doors and slab in their current configuration,
and for not requiring their removal or relocation. These justifications include:
A. Tree removal and tree damage would result from a new driveway apron
within the lot boundaries east of the garage.
B. Additional hardcover would be needed to develop such a driveway apron.
C. Other garages in the neighborhood are situated similarly to applicant's
existing garage.
5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and
recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments
by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
6. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar
to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that
granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor
pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely
Page 3 of 7
serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a
demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial
property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and
intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS
Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance
to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(D) to allow the existing detached
garage plus the proposed additions to be located 0.2' from the street lot line where a 1 0' street
setback would normally be required, and a variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(E) to allow
the proposed 1,000 s.f. footprint building to be located at setbacks ranging from .2' to 9.3' from
lot lines where a 15' setback from any lot line is required, and a variance to Section 10.25,
Subdivision 6(B) to allow a side setback less than the required 1 O' for accessory structures in
the LR-IC zone, subject to the following conditions:
1. Applicant shall reduce the size of the final garage structure including the
addition such that the footprint does not exceed 1,000 s.f.
2. Reconstruction of the roof to create a higher pitched gable is approved subject
to redesign resulting in no encroachment of the street lot line by the roof
overhangs.
3. If applicant later determines that the superstructure of the existing garage must
be totally reconstructed, this application will require further review by the City
Council.
4. Applicant may retain the existing garage doors facing the road as well as the
existing driveway apron within the right-of-way.
5. A building permit for the garage remodeling/addition shall not be issued by the
City until exterior work on the house pursuant to building permit #7225 is
completed.
6. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant,
but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building
permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will
expire on that date (September 9, 1997).
Page 4 of 7
7. 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.
8. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms
of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns,
hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the
property.
Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of September, 1996.
ATTEST:
Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor
Property Owner( s)
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of
September, 1996, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & 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 7
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this __ day of ________ , 199_ before me a Notary Public within
and for said county, personally appeared -------------------known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and
acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed.
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this __ day of ________ , 199 before me a Notary Public within
and for said county, personally appeared -------------------known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and
acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed.
NOTARY PUBLIC
Page 6 of 7
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. ___ _
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
All that part of Lot 28, Spring Park, lying westerly of a line described
as follows: Commencing at a point on the northerly line of said Lot 28,
distant 45.5 feet southwesterly, measured along said northerly line from
the northeasterly corner of said Lot 28 which corner is marked by a
judicial landmark; thence southerly along a straight line to the shore of
Lake Minnetonka, said straight line passing through a point, marked by a
judicial landmark, which is 9 feet westerly, measured at right angles,
with the easterly line of said Lot 28, from a point in said easterly line
of said Lot 28, distant 262.5 feet southerly from the northeasterly cor
ner of said Lot 28; also all of Lots 29 arid 30, together with and includ
ing that part of Lake Shore Avenue, vacated, lying in said Lots 29 and 30
and in that part of said Lot 28 hereinbefore described, all in Spring
Park, _according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office
of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota, an-d the
Northwesterly corner of Lot 30 having been marked with a judicial land
mark, and a further judicial land mark having been located on the west
erly line of Lot 30 at a point which is 249.2 feet southerly from the
northwesterly corner thereof.
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed:
Name Michael P. Gaffron
Title Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator
DATE: September 4, 1996
ITEM NO.:
Agenda Section:
Zoning
Item Description: #2160 David & Jennifer Dotzenroth, 3225 Casco Circle -Variances -Resolution
Zoning District: LR-lC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, sewered, 1/2 acre.
Application: Request for street setback and side setback variances to construct additions to existing
detached garage.
List of Exhibits
A -Resolution
B -Notice of Planning Commission Action
C -Revised Building Plans/Site Plan
D -Memo and Exhibits of 8/15/96
Discussion
Please review the memo and exhibits of August 15th. Briefly, applicants propose to construct a
16'x24' addition to the rear of the existing garage. The existing garage is less than 1' from the street
lot line, and opens toward the street. While this area of Casco Circle has relatively low traffic, under
the current configuration applicants or their guests park on the garage apron which is completely
within the right-of-way.
The proposed addition will provide additional garage space, and will also raise the roof pitch to
allow for storage space above the garage. Issues of concern include:
adding to the bulk of structure within the required side and street yard areas (proposed
1,000 s.f. total footprint requires side setback of 15', and 30' street setback for garage
with doors open towards street);
making the existing nonconforming structure more permanent via the proposed
additions;
the potential additional roof overhang into the right-of-way.
Planning Commission Recommendation
Because the property is relatively large (nearly an acre), and because 75-250' zone hardcover is well
within the 25% limit (existing= 13.3%), Planning Commission felt the entry to the garage should
be moved to the east side within the property boundaries, which would still yield a conforming level
of hardcover. Planning Commission's recommendation included the following:
Request for Council Action continued
page 2 of 3
September 4, 1996
Zoning File #2160
1. Footprint of garage structure including addition must not exceed 1,000 s.f. (this
means applicant will have to reduce it from 16'x24' to 15.6'x24'.
2. Approval of roof reconstruction to create a higher pitched gable.
3. Garage stall doors must be relocated to east side of garage.
4. Concrete apron in right-of-way must be removed.
5. House exterior work must be completed prior to issuance of building permit for
garage remodeling/ addition.
Applicants were requested to submit a revised site plan and building proposal. Those plans are
attached as Exhibit C. Note that the garage overhang as proposed will extend 1-2' into the right-of
way. Also note that applicants propose three stall doors on the east side of the building, and have
eliminated the doors opening toward the street. The site plan indicates a parking apron within the
property, of approximately 30'x40', which will result in a 75-250' hardcover level of approximately
19%.
Applicants note that this configuration will necessitate the removal of at least one tree, and
potentially dam.age the root system of the large maple tree to the rear of the garage. They are also
concerned that this will have a negative impact on parking in the neighborhood.
Planning Com.mission was also concerned that the current house remodeling project has been under
way for some time, and that the one year period for completing the exterior work on the house was
nearing an end. Planning Commission suggested that approval for the garage variances be
conditioned on no perm.it being issued for garage construction until the house exterior work is
complete.
Staff Recommendation
Staff has drafted a resolution reflecting the Planning Com.mission recommendation, and including
a condition that the overhang at the north end of the garage be eliminated to result in no
encroachment of roof overhang into the right-of-way.
Options for Action
1. Approve the attached resolution per Planning Com.mission recommendation.
2. Approve with revisions.
3. Table for further information.
4. Conceptual denial of requested variances.
5. Other.
Request for Council Action continued
page 3 of 3
September 4, 1996
Zoning File #2160
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Action to approve, amend, or conceptually deny the requested street and side setback variances.
ch
A RESOLUTION GRANTING
VARIANCES TO
MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9(D),
SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9(E), AND
SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6(B)
FILE #2160
WHEREAS, David A. Dotzenroth (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the
property located at 3225 Casco Circle within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally
described as follows:
Exhibit A attached (hereinafter "the property"); and
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal
Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(D) to allow the existing detached garage plus the
proposed additions to be located 0.2' from the street lot line where a 10' street setback would
normally be required, and a variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(E) to allow the proposed
1,000 s.f. footprint building to be located at setbacks ranging from 0.2' to 9.3' from lot lines
where a 15' setback from any lot line is required, and a variance to Section 10.25, Subdivision
6(8) to allow a side setback less than the required 1 O' for accessory structures in the LR-1 C
zone.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono,
Minnesota:
FINDINGS
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2160.
2. The property is located in the LR-lC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential
Zoning District.
Page 1 of 7
3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 19, 1996,
and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon and subject to
the following findings and conditions:
A. The existing garage is located as near as 0.2' to the street lot line and
4.4' to the side lot line. The proposed addition to the rear of the garage
will range from 7.4' to 9.3' from the side lot line.
B. Applicant further proposes to reconstruct and construct a new roof over
the existing garage and proposed addition, such new roof being steeper
in pitch than the existing roof, and portions of it constituting new
structure in locations not meeting the required setbacks from the street
and side property boundaries.
C. The existing garage doors open toward the street, making the existing
garage nonconforming because a garage with doors facing the street is
required by code to be setback 30' from the street lot line.
D. It would be inappropriate to construct the magnitude of additions
proposed while continuing the direct access to the street (Casco Circle),
which currently forces parking to occur within the street right-of-way
where such parking is generally discouraged or disallowed by Municipal
Zoning Code Sections 8.20 and 10.61, Subdivisions 4 and 5.
E. Applicant has agreed to eliminate the garage stall doors facing the street
and has agreed to place such doors on the east side of the
existing/proposed garage structure, and to develop a driveway apron
within the property boundaries to accommodate maneuvering and parking
outside of the right-of-way.
F. The proposed addition located as near as 7.4' from the side lot line will
have no significant impact on neighboring property or on the
neighborhood. Raising the pitch of the roof over the existing/proposed
garage located only 0.2' from the street lot line and as near as 4.4' from
the side lot line, will have no negative impact on the neighboring
Page 2 of 7
property owner or the neighborhood, since there are other similarly
situated detached garages in the neighborhood.
G. Planning Commission finds that the reconfiguration of the garage stalls
to enter the east side of the garage, and the concurrent construction of a
new driveway/parking area to the east of the garage structure, will have
minimal hardcover impact and will not cause a nonconforming hardcover
problem, but will result in hardcover in the 75-250' zone at a level less
than 20%, where 25% hardcover would be allowable.
H. Planning Commission recommends that further parking within the right
of-way be discouraged by requiring that the applicant remove the existing
concrete apron located within the right-of-way of Casco Circle.
4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and
recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments
by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar
to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that
granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor
pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely
serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a
demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial
property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and
intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS
Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance
to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(D) to allow the existing detached
garage plus the proposed additions to be located 0.2' from the street lot line where a 10' street
setback would normally be required, and a variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(E) to allow
the proposed 1,000 s.f. footprint building to be located at setbacks ranging from .2' to 9.3' from
Page 3 of 7
lot lines where a 15' setback from any lot line is required, and a variance to Section 10.25,
Subdivision 6(B) to allow a side setback less than the required 10' for accessory structures in
the LR-IC zone, subject to the following conditions:
1. Applicant shall reduce the size of the final garage structure including the
addition such that the footprint does not exceed 1,000 s.f.
2. Reconstruction of the roof to create a higher pitched gable is approved subject
to redesign resulting in no encroachment of the street lot line by the roof
overhangs.
3. Garage stall doors must be relocated to the east side of the garage.
4. The concrete apron in right-of-way of Casco Circle must be removed at the time
the garage stall doors are relocated to the east side of the garage.
5. A building permit for the garage remodeling/addition shall not be issued by the
City until exterior work on the house pursuant to building permit #7225 is
completed.
6. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant,
but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building
permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will
expire on that date (September 9, 1997).
7. 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.
Page 4 of 7
8. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms
of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns,
hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the
property.
Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of September, 1996.
ATTEST:
Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor
Property Owner( s)
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) .
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of
September, 1996, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & 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 7
CITY OF ORONO
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
473-7357
ZONING FILE #2160
NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION
ACTION
DATE OF NOTICE: August 21, 1996 ______________________ , __ _
----------------------------------------------------------
TO: David and Jennifer Dotzenroth
3 225 Casco Circle
COPIES:
Wayzata, MN 55391
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variances
DATE OF MEETING: 08/19/96 VOTE: 6 FOR O AGAINST
Planning Commission recommends the following:
Approval subject to conditions noted below.
NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
1. Footprint of garage structure including addition must not exceed 1000 s.f.
2. Reconstruction of roof to crete a higher pitched gable is recommend for
approval.
3. Garage stall doors must be relocated to east side of garage.
4. Concrete apron in right-of-way must be removed.
5. House exterior work must be completed prior to issuance of building permit for
garage remodeling/ addition.
NOTE: Although not specifically discussed at the meeting, you should consider redesigning
the proposed overhang on the north end of garage to avoid its encroaching into the
right-of-way.
Additional information is requested, as follows:
Please submit a revised site plan and building proposal meeting the above noted
conditions, by September 2. Contact Mike Gaffron at 473-7357 if you have any
questions.
Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as:
City Council, Monday, September 9, 1996; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m.
If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available
from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission.
lsv
FROM
To: Mike (}affron
City of Orono
From: Jeni1ifbr & David Dotzenroth
Ref.: Zoning File #2160
Mike:
F' •
August 3 1, 1 996
Plca1,e find enclosed the revised site plan and building proposal meeting the
conditions requested by planning cornmission . Unfortunately 1T10ving doors to eastern
::siJ._, uf ::.lr-u1:LLffl.' will rn::11:r.:ssil.:1.L<: thr.: rt:m.uvc:tl uf urn: hi1:kUQ' ln;c.;,, i.1ml pu::;sibli;:
r..lt:l<::riuraliun of ,oul si'ste1n tu larJ:!,e n1.aph: lr<::<;., in urr..li.::r lo a1.:eurur11udal<..'. ap1u11 u11 <.:<cLSl<..'.1·11
::;i<le of structun;. Tl,is will also enc.;ourage parking of c.;ars by non inhabitants on stn:..:t
and in park.
'w'e will pan to anend the Septen1be1· 9th City Council meeting ,1.t 7:00 p.1n.
Thnnk. Yo,1
The Dotze1u-oths
..,
\_
\
f 'd
\()
' v:-)
~~' --\,,..,.,.
' J \ ~ I s.. ·~
/\ ~-
0;
7,~
L
~··
-
-
-
-
,,
\
\
~
\
"ti (u \,t~ 9(j -'-1:: . WQ ~
/'fVT.;f_.J f:l.J..=, ?\J 1,; j • j I \..J
\.()
\I
'
To:
From:
Date:
Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members
Ron Moorse , City Administrator
Michael P . Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator
August 15, 1996
Subject: #2160 David Dotzenroth, 3225 Casco Circle -Variance -Public Hearing
Zoning District: LR-IC , Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1/2 Acre , Sewered
Application: Request for side setback and str~et setback variances to construct additions to
existing detached garage.
List of Exhibits
A -Application
B -Plat Map
C -Property Owners List
D -Acknowledgements from Neighboring Property Owners
E -Supplemental Letter Including Hardship Statement
F -Survey
G -Construction Plan
H -Hardcover Calculations Submitted by Applicant
I -Staff Hardcover Review
J -Staff sketch: Driveway concept
Pertinent Code Sections
1.
2.
Section 10.25 , Subd. 6 (B): Required = 10', Required front (street) yard = 30'
Section 10.03 , Subd. 9 (D): "No detached garages or other accessory buildings shall
be located nearer the front or street lot line than the principal building on that lot except
on lots which have frontage on a lake and rear yard adjacent to a street , accessory
buildings located within the street or rear yards of such lots are subject to the setback
requirements of Section .... 10.25 , Subd. 6 (B) except that detached garages may be
located 1 O' from the street or rear lot line when doors face away from the street and a
turnaround is provided on site."
3. Section 10.03 , Subd. 13: "Accessory buildings which are for the storage of automobiles
shall have the doors 30' or more from the property line when said doors face on a
public alley or street."
4 . Section 10.03 , Subd. 9 (E): "Accessory structures in excess of 750 s.f. footprint but
not exceeding 1,000 s.f. footprint area shall be located at least 15' from any lot line."
Zoning File #2160
August 15, 1996
Page 2
Summary of Request
Applicants propose two additions to the existing garage which is located less than 1' from the
street lot line and from 4.4' to 7.4' from the side lot line. The existing garage has doors which
face Casco Circle, leaving virtually no room for parking in front of the garage other than
within the right-of-way. Currently, additional parking is in a graveled area directly adjacent
to the garage.
Applicants propose to construct a 24' x 16' addition to the rear of the existing garage, and
replace the existing 8:12 pitch roof with a steeper 12:12 pitch roof, enclosing some storage
space. Applicant has indicated he does not propose to move the garage stall doors to the side
as shown on the construction elevation views, but intends to leave the doors facing the street.
The existing garage is non-conforming from the perspective that with doors facing the street
it should be 30' from the street lot line and 1 O' from the side lot line. The proposed garage
will in many respects be even more non-conforming because the added size places it into a
category (750-1,000 s.f.) which requires a 15' side setback.
Discussion
Applicant has indicated in his supplementary information letter (Exhibit E) that the existing
garage is a sound structure with proper frost footing foundation, and that the costs to tear it
down and start over in the location meeting the setback requirements would be cost-prohibitive.
Further, he notes that a large 4' diameter maple tree would be lost if the entire structure was
moved to meet the required setbacks. The garage addition as proposed will be approximately
12' from the base of that tree.
The existing garage has an 18' concrete apron between the garage doors and the traveled
surface of Casco Circle. While this leaves room to park two full size cars without extending
into traffic, all of that parking is within the right-of-way. The reason the City Code requires
a 30' street lot line setback for garage doors facing the street, is to allow substantial off-street
parking outside of the right-of-way. Given the relatively narrow width of pavement on Casco
Circle, it would be in the best interests of the City to decrease parking within the right-of-way.
And, technically per Municipal Code Section 8.20, parking vehicles between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00
a.m. upon any public street (defined as the right-of-way) is prohibited. Obviously, this has not
been enforced in most neighborhoods.
Further, Zoning Code Section 10.61, Subd. 5 (A) indicates that within residential districts, "All
vehicles normally owned or kept by the occupants on the premises must have a garage stall
or open parking space on the same lot as the principal use served ... ". Also, Subd. 4 "Purpose
of Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements", states that "regulation of off-street parking
and loading spaces in this chapter is to alleviate or prevent congestion of the public right-of
way and so to promote the safety and general welfare of the public by establishing minimum
Zoning File #2160
August 15, 1996
Page 3
requirements for off-street parking, loading and unloading for motor vehicles in accordance with
the utilization of various parcels of land and structures."
In staffs opinion, while the proposed garage addition and roof reconstruction will have little
impact on neighboring properties, it will increase the permanence of the current non-conforming
situation. One way to mitigate this would be to require that the garage entrance doors be
relocated to the side (as shown in applicant's construction elevations, Exhibit G), and
establishment of driveway and parking area directly east of the garage. Then, the magnitude
of variance for street setback reduces form 29.8' to 9.8', and a parking non-conformity is
resolved.
Existing hardcover in the 75-250' zone is approximately 13.3%. Adding the 16' x 24' garage
addition and a new 30' x 26' driveway entering the garage on the east side, and removing the
8' x 8' shed results in 75-250' hardcover of 17.1 %, still significantly below the 25% limit. This
driveway would require minor changes in landscaping, but would not eliminate an excessive
number of trees. Applicants have stated they do not want to lose trees if at all possible.
Staff Recommendation
Applicants should reduce the size of the addition to approximately 24' x 15.6', so that the entire
building stays below the 1,000' limit.
If Planning Commission concludes that the proposed addition is in an appropriate location,
Planning Commission should also consider whether the conversion from a hip roof to a steeper
gable roof less than 1' from the street lot line, is justified by sufficient hardship and whether
it is appropriate in the context of the surrounding neighborhood. Finally, staff recommends that
if the proposed addition and roof conversion is approved, applicants should relocate the existing
garage doors to the east side, and construct a new driveway access as shown on Exhibit J,
which will reduce the magnitude of the variances needed (garage will only need a 9.8' variance
instead of a 29.8' variance for street setback) and eliminate parking on the right-of-way. In that
case, it may be appropriate to request that applicants remove the portions of the existing
concrete apron located within the right-of-way.
Options for Action
1. Recommend approval as proposed by applicant.
2. Recommend approval with conditions.
3. Table for further information (specify).
4. Recommend denial, stating reasons.
5. Other.
lsv
CITY OF ORONO -VARIAN CE APPLICATION
Initial Application Fee $220.00
($50.00 per each additional variance)
Renewal Variance Fee $120.00
(no change from original application)
Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00
After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee)
PROPERTY INFORMATION
Application #
Date Received
Amount Paid
d-,.j bO I
7 ; <2-s / r 6
,;l;:J__O 00
Zip:
OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) _______ _
Name________________ Phone (work) _______ _
Address:____________ City: _______ -.-Zip: ___ _
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST . . _ Estimated Constructi_!_ Cost$ i, '"'o O _'!.'.:
Descnbe request m detail: S c.;, -"" f"-!J&, :b. , ¥) -~ Qf" 1lf:'.:~
(attach additional sheets if necessary)
VARIANCES REQUIRED
Lot Area
X Setback: Front
Lot Width
)</Side
Hardcover
Rear
__ Lot Coverage
Average Lakeshore
__ Other (specify) _______________________ _
HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS
Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing
compliance with Zoning Code requirements: ________________ _
( attach additional sheets if necessary)
7
REQUIRED SUB1\1ITTALS
All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in
order for your application to be considered complete:
I. Completed Application Form
2. 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, 348-3271).
3. Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover
calculations as required. In addition, provide one ( 1) copy 8 ½" 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.
5. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8½" x 11 ").
6. 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).
7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other
persons you wish notified of this application.
8. 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 to the best of his/her knowledge.
Applicant's Signatu~ 0,...QJ~~ .. ~ J\-...... Date _ _.;t_____.1;.c:....c"""---L--.--
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 investigation and verification of this request.
Owner's Signature~4:, 9-~ ~. Date r:z -?-3"Lj\_
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.
8
60 :60
✓
4 1 40 39
29) (28)
50/\ 60 ,'\
I ,' I ,'t,
I . ! I I•
I , I ,' I ,
LOT I 50 SPRING PAR!<
(31) .· ·.
j
~. ---. _ __. . .,.,,,.,-,-
-..
II
RUN DATE 07/24/96
BATCH 504
PROP ADDR
Ol'INER NAME
TAXPAYER
NAME/ADDR
PROP ADDR
OWNER NAME·
TAXPAYER .
NAME/ADDR
PROP ADDR
OWNER NAME
TAXPAYER
NAME/ADDR
PROP ADDR
OWNER NAME
TAXPAYER
NAME/AD DR
38 20-i17-23 43 0005
00038 ADDRESS UNASSIG~IED
MARY SUSAN SWANSON
MARY SUSAN SWANSON
3229 CASCO CIR
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 20-117-23 43 0017
00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
DC PLAIN & PL PLAIN
D CHARLES PLAIN
3227 CASCO CIR
WAYZATA MN 55391,
38 20-117-23 43 0020
OD038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
DC PLAIN & PL PLAIN
D CHARLES PLAIN
3227 CASCO CIR
.WAYZATA MN 55391
38 20-117-23 43 0031
00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
THE CASCO CO
THE CASCO COMPANY
ROBERTO MACNIE
3135 CASCO CIR
WAYZATA MN 55391
HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPER"{V INFORMATION SYSTEM
PROPERTY OWNERS LIST
REPORT NO. PI435401
38 20-117-23.43 0015
03233 CASCO CIR
D M SPILSETH & PD SPILSETH
DAVID M SPILSETH
3233 CASCO CIRCLE
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 20-117-23 43 0018
03227 CASCO CIR
DC PLAIN & PL PLAIN
D CHARLES PLAIN
3227 CASCO CIR
HAYZATA MN 55391
38 20-117-23 43 0021
03225 CASCO CIR
DAIVD A DOTZENROTH
DAVID A DOTZENROTH
3225 CASCO POINT CIR
HAYZATA MN 55391
TOTAL BATCH 504 00010
38 20-117-23 43 0016
03231 CASCO CIR
J E COOPER & J E COOPER
J E COOPER & J E codPER
3231 CASCO.CIR.
WAYZATA MN 5!391
38 20-117-23 43 0019
03227 CASCO CIR
DC PLAIN & PL PLAIN
D CHARLES PLAIN
3227 CASCO CIR.
HAYZATA MN 55391
38 20-117-23 43 0022
03205 CASCO CIR
CONISTON ESTATES INC
CONISTON ESTATES INC
7 BROAD ST
CHARLESTON SC 29401
PAGE 8
I .CERTIFY THAt THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE
REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION 'AS IT APPEARS THIS bATE ON THE R!:CORbS
OF tHE HEt.'l'IEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST
OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF.,. . ~.·. A:f. 1111--:)
. DATE 1 ~'~'"' BY ___ _Jgg ____ . ~-~----------· Al.i,.
i
"' ' ().
Jeanne Mabusth
Orono Building and Zoning Administrator
2750 Kelly Parkway
POBOX66
Crystal Bay, MN.
612-473-7357
Dear Jeanne:
et-I{ . D -/
June 24 , 1996
Concerning the Dotzenroth proposed garage addition at 3225 Casco Circle , We the
Hawkinson's of the abutting west side of the Dotzenroth 's lot# 30 have no objection to
their proposed addition to extend southward from their existing garage.
Thank You
\
Douglas and Cheryl Hawkinson
Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form
I (we) ~G uC.-s {{-lt-w k; IN~ ,J
[print name( s)]
of 3~ Cf-s-Cd Cr ~
[print address]
have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located
at 3;2...;}$ ~C.O C ,~lso referred to as Land Use Application No. ;;l__ I (o ().
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
pro· ect or use rz. Council approval .
Date
Property Owner Date
:::..£*,j...,j.-,j?****************.*******************************************************~
.J
. ···---·_./
I (we) ______________ of ___________ _
[print name(s)] [print address]
have reviewed the plans · for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located
at __________ also referred to as Land Use Application No. ___ _
I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to
declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City
Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's
project or use requires Council approval.
Property Owner Date
Property Owner Date
If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use
Application, please submit your corn.rnents to the Burlding & Zoning Office at least 10 days
prior to the scheduled meeting date. ·
9
To : Mike Gaffron
Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator
City of Orono
From David & Jennifer Dotzenroth
Ref.: Garage Addition/Variance Application # 2160
3225 Casco Circle
Wayzata, MN. 55391
Dear Mr. Gaffron:
AUG 3 ,!,
Thank You for your facsimile and letter with the information mentioned in your
preliminary review of our application. We hope that the enclosed information will assist
you in granting our request.
1. Please find amendment in survey to show setback measurements from the side lot
line at both front and rear corners.
2. Accurate length and width dimensions of the proposed garage will be:
Width= 24' x Length= 41.7' (see survey) 1000 sq. feet total.
3.& 4. Existing garage doors will remain only. Moving doors to eastern side of
structure was an idea given by Ms. Mabusth, however this plan would necessitate
more driveway. Existing garage doors and existing driveway provide necessary
access to structure, thus eliminating any additional hardcover.
5. The undue hardship and or practical difficulty as well as unusual property
conditions which prevent us from complying with Zoning Code requirements are as
follows: A) The existing garage is a good sound structure with the proper frost
footing foundation. B) Adding on to the existing garage would be the most cost
effective. Costs of tearing down existing structure, electric's, driveway and
foundation etc. coupled with the cost of reconstructing same in zone setback
requirements would estimate to be an additional $17,000.00 or more. C) Moving
addition to zone setback requirements would require removal of a 4' diameter
maple tree, which is our largest shade tree. D) Keeping the structure where it
currently exists is an environmentally positive thing eliminating much waste to the
city dump, and saving a beautiful tree.
We hope this clears up any questions you may have with regards to our application.
Thank you for allowing us to complete the incomplete. If you have any other questions
please feel free to give us a call or fax.
Regards,
David & Jennifer Dotzenroth
-
f_'ct1/{EO
ttt.. fz_J/99&
c11sco
c1 ectt
' ..
-
/
. ...-
i .,1
\ I ;;+.(; y 1,,1,·"
\ I
J \\ st f ,rJI
pro f1/J
fi,ttOP
3'1-r,,'frcl'S
-z,s"I--B
c,>,JC.
~/)WK
' ,\---t q------1
I
I --------
' /
,-/
j/1!(/Sf!ol'~, ;1 //f·
[\f !lcrrfV)
-~-----
\
(
' J
I
Jf"b-9 --------
---------
---
---------
~
0
~
~
/
---__,.fvf.' {,CJ /2 () r J.o T Z ~
s~tei,v_J f11ex:
•=Tu.dr'a1'AL. nltJA...!u.mF,uT
f rJ1 /1/2.Efl::: ,41, ()6?5 (I.IT
BiT IYRE/J :::291.e 5c?.FT
(:c!VC.,/Jf<,Efl.-: 68. 8 S Q,rT
futJof)fTl5t°S :. 1g,o SQ.FT
o;?t!N f?ol'cJ/c 7 j), 'J5<tH,
f~tfT:& A I?. 1/Rf',4 = 4-5Z. 7 StJFT,
o!s[f/o, 11~r;J:_ 1-1-86'.t )qff.
ff!o/b)FP /1/YJ-= 43?, 7 Sf.Ft.
I / F ,//,VC (J/' 4,f ZB r {l7/!/',11J t°AJ".A:'
. ...----
·.,
I
All that part of Lot 28, Spring Park, lying westerly of a line described
as follows: Commencing at a point on the n6rtherly line of said Lot 28,
distant 45.5 feet southwesterly, measured along said northerly line from
the northeasterly corner of said Lot 28 which corner is marked by a
judicial landmark; thence southerly along a straight line to the shore of
Lake Minnetonka, said straight line passing through a point, marked by a
judicial landmark, which is 9 feet westerly, measured at right angles,
with the easterly line of said Lot 28, from a point in said easterly line
of said Lot 28, distant 262.5 feet southerly from the northeasterly cor
ner of said Lot 28; also all of Lots 29 atid 30, together with and includ
ing that part of Lake Shore Avenue, vacated, lying in said Lots 29 and 30
and in that part of said Lot 28 hereinbefore described, all in Spring
Park, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office
of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota, and the
Northwesterly corner of Lot 30 having been marked with a judicial land
mark, and a further judicial land mark having been located on the west
erly line of Lot 30 at a point which is 249.2 feet southerly from the
northwesterly corner thereof.
JOB#
SCHOBORG
ND SURVEYING
I hereby certify that this plan, survey or report was
prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am
a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State
ofM~
4-,.56
~Ok -Page
LJ/ltJE
£l,1,J'2'.ENROT/I ~
972-3221
INC.
Al. 1, Box 208
Delano, MN 55328
Date: -!L.'<c / Y ZB,/9<7£ Registration No. 14700
~ -t::: 9
Scale
//~30 I
""
'11
HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET
SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000'
EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE
A. House
-Po\'Ll)
tJJ ool). :'.::>~ S
l 9f>5 ·'-AB'9;tlXI
B. Garage
C. fui-veway
E. Patio/Deck
F. Landscape
Underlain
By Plastic
G .
Length
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Width
i~~ / X I ~~---8 i-'B
=
=
=
=
=
TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 1!) -
TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE Lj //DC,S---
A 3 3 1;1 B .:J..'7.SBo -0 x 100 =
PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE
A. House
Length
B. Garage .2 _,;\
1 F ~ w,e...,r,e_. "\ O e.im, ~. Q
-1 C. Driveway --....j
TO C,aJyr\ ,eM..r, . , 11 Q_ * fvO y l r,-t\J~ ~
D. Sidewalk
E. Patio/Deck
F . Landscape
Underlain
By Plastic
G. Other ;
.sl~ B
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE
Width
=
10
=
I I
A
TOTAL PRO ERTY AREA IN ZONE 0 4 I fol/. B J..J 5 So x 100 =
13
S .F. \185.l.o
7l5. 5 S 1F.
__ ,..._l _._2 .._~'"""0,-<..._ S.F.
--~-~-· 5_ .. _,_,s_ : t r~
.:___ .. -~
-o -S.F.
--_-co----S.F t;~_;_:_:;;l~-4
r -'---=-6 -=:Sd=-ta~ S.F.
-:J°J/.;J.) ,
_-_o_-___ S .F (\ ,-t, t1. '•I
-n -S.F. ,,_':.;1 ., -----
0: fl -o -S.F . ·-(--,~.
--~--SF "'1>·.~ .. c-. . l':l
S.F .
---+'7--+-7 • :!.__ S .F. (,,'f • D
3 ,. 3 t '7. -F.
;J,. '7 58b o S.F .
.1'-b.03 % %
l~ 85_ '=, S.F.
S.F.
S.F -
S.F .
.-Soo· 0 S.F.
S.F .
~fj ~ S.F.
-o-S_F.
-o-S.F.
-o-S.F.
-0 -S.F .
-o-S.F.
-o-S.F.
ry 7, ()
S.F.
(,.'-I . 0 4
4 . / tpk/ . . S.F.
:;__7 5 gc P s.F .
~t.S Lo ~o %
A
A
B
CITY of ORONO
Street Address:
2750 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356
Municipal Offices
Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323--0066
HARDCOVER ORDINANCE -In 1975, the Orono City Council adopted an ordinance
limiting the percentage of lot area that can be covered with impervious surface ("hardcover")
such as roofs, driveways, sidewalks, etc. on properties located within 1,000 feet of a lake.
Studies have shown that sediments, oils, and debris carried into the lake from highly urbanized
areas have a detrimental impact on the quality of water in the lake. The intent of Orono's
ordinance is to ensure that rainfall run-off will be cleansed by filtering through grassed or
vegetated yard areas before entering the lake.
Hardcover Zones -Allowed Percentages:
0-75 0%
75-250' 25%
250-500' 30%
500-1000' 35%
Hardcover includes:
-Roofs
-Sidewalks
-Paved or gravel driveways
-Patios & decks (includes slatted decks)
-Tops of retaining walls & rock walls
-Decorative landscape areas underlain by plastic sheeting or fabric
-Any other surface that does not allow direct absorption of rainfall into
the ground
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING HARDCOVER CALCULATION
WORKSHEET
1. Circle which setback zone (0-75', 75-250', etc.) the calculation is for.
2. For each item of hardcover within that zone, enter the length and width, and multiply
to get square footage (s.f.).
3. Add up all the square footages to get total square footage of hardcover.
4. Divide by the total area of property within the zone and multiply by 100 to get
percentage of hardcover in the zone.
5. If changes in hardcover are proposed, you should do a "before" worksheet and· "after
worksheet. If either results in percentages greater than those allowed, contact City staff
before proceeding with your project planning!
Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510
12
(!j+l ,r
• e/.lS71N~ ..
::. ~i .r. s. I I
7~ s. :,
-'3o ~ -{'_ ,,, ~
-2-t., 0 ..(J., \\~ -
1,.;q ~-f. l?;, .
-~z.t-/ .,,., .r: /r -
e.--17 J',
:::: ~~ sf...
------~7~5_-_2.SD I U"JCI-2..ro-~• ,J\lo~ .. Z-°1, ~f.?~ s f ~
Tl? fk ~ 71 .o&~ s:£. ±
---------=-------==0:,:::::....:..{J.(Z_:,____~=-..!L_..L-:) /o=----Y----=Z-~+-----___,,:-1""-'-'~"--lt-s-=--_ -'--' ____ _
}Je'N
3D'x-Uo' .:-780 s.£, ---------,
__ 3_°f_ll +ss'-1 +,so-IPL/-= sr9 tTJ-oi ,~tor: -11. l 1/o ✓
At>b • 'f;>wPN'. SHeb
----~O"tef ~ C~•/Ji:?t:C:::.~-~ '5~ £._,/~ ~~~~,---------------
-~-
-
'"-·
('. ---~
C
~ ------~
\
\
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 19, 1996
(#4 -#2151 John and Janice Hurd -Continued)
Peterson reviewed the variances required of hardcover in the 250-500' setback and
average lakeshore setback. He noted his own view of being consistent in not voting for
average lakeshore setbacks as a matter of principle . The application was tabled from the
last Planning Commission meeting in order to respond to the concerns of the neighbors .
This seems to have been rectified by the adjustments made in the plan to eliminate any
leapfrog effect . Peterson commented that the boat house is in excellent condition and
seems appropriate to allow it to remain.
Stoddard was informed by Coombs that the new placement of the home will be held to a
line from the Thielmann's home and recorded on a survey . Thielmann acknowledged that
the approv;al should include the survey.
Smith said she did have a concern over the lakeshore setback. Hurd said the home now
exists much further into the setback . If the home was moved back any further , it would
create an ev en deeper tunnel effect.
Coombs said he believed the Grundeen's home would be remodeled at some point. With
the drawing of the imaginary line, it would keep their home within that setback also .
Stoddard moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval as submitted with the addition
of the survey line included in the approval. Vote : Ayes 4 , Nays 1, Peterson, due to the
principle of the average lakeshore setback. Lindquist did not participate in the vote as he
conducted the review.
(#5) #2159 JAMES AND JOANN JUNDT, 1400 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD -
VARIANCES-PUBLIC HEARING 8:09-8:10 P.M.
The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted.
Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to table Application #2159 at the request of the
applicants. Vote : Ayes 5, Nays 0 . Berg was not in the chambers at the time of the vote.
(#6) #2160 DAVID DOTZENROTH, 3225 CASCO CIRCLE -VARIANCES -
PUBLIC HEARING 8:10-8:40 P.M.
The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted .
The Applicant was present.
9
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 19, 1996
(#6 -#2160 David Dotzenroth -Continued)
Gaffron reported that the application is for side and street setback variances for an
addition to the rear of the garage. The lot area, lot width, and hardcover allowances are
all conforming. The corners of the garage are at 4.4' and 7.4' from the side lot line where
10' is normal. With the proposed 750 s.f footprint, the required setback is increased to
15'. The garage is now 1-2' from the street lot line and the concrete slab extends out over
that. The addition would include a roof change from a low pitch to a 12: 12 pitch. The
purpose of the addition is for storage. The proposal shows an end load or possibly a side
door to allow for backing up into the property. This would allow the off-street parking to
be out of the right-of-way. Gaffron said Staff believes it would be more appropriate to
have a side door configuration but noted it would add hardcover with the driveway apron
for parking. This might have an impact on the trees on the wooded property. Gaffron
added that the code for doors facing the street requires a 30' setback. This relates to busy
streets which is not the case in this situation. He noted there is no other option for
parking under the current layout as the garage is against the lot line.
Dotzenroth reported that he has lived in the area for 43 years owning several homes.
Letters from the neighbors noted approval of his application. Dotzenroth said the front
exposed doors and concrete apron allows for a parking area for guests. He noted that the
property in the circle now owned by the City was once owned by his family. Dotzenroth
said if the road was improved, it would not infringe on the neighbors but to the park only.
Dotzenroth said ifhe changed the doors to face the east, it might cause problems in the
winter time. He added that a 30' setback would require the probable elimination of a
hickory and black walnut tree. If pushed any further back, it would also take out a 4'
maple. Dotzenroth said there is no traffic problem in the area noting the dead end street.
Although he does not park on the concrete apron, his guests do, and this aids in keeping
cars out of the park area. He said he is not in favor of trailers and brush being within the
park as there now exists. Dotzenroth added that the expansion would allow the roof to be
in the same style as his 1882 Victorian home and give him options for storage.
Lindquist asked if there was a problem with keeping within the 1000 s.f limit. Dotzenroth
said the expansion is not much over that amount, and his benefit is in gaining the 12:12
pitch. Gaffron asked if the garage could be reduced 6" in length, which would keep the
garage within the 1000 s.f Dotzenroth said this could be done.
10
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
:MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 19, 1996
(#6 -#2160 David Dotzenroth -Continued)
Smith asked what the use of the addition was for and who would construct it. Dotzenroth
said the expansion would allow his vehicles to be stored within and noted that he would
contract out for the work. Smith asked what the time frame would be for the home
completion, garage, and yard cleanup. Dotzenroth said the home was started last year,
and he is in the process of finishing the roof and walkway. He thought the home would be
completed in a couple months. The yard should be cleaned up of construction material at
that time. Dotzenroth said the garage would be done after the home and all should be
completed by spring of 1997. He said all of the work including landscaping will be done
within the time frame of the one year variance allotment.
Hawn asked if the entry to the side could be accomplished without destroying the black
walnut tree. Dotzenroth said he has not measured it, and it would be close. She asked
about the 3-car garage but 2-car design. Dotzenroth said two stalls are tandem.
Berg asked ifDotzenroth intended on keeping the sheds on the property. Dotzenroth said
one of the sheds would be eliminated.
Smith asked Dotzenroth for his choice of either the garage pulled back with a side apron
or a steeper gabled roof Dotzenroth preferred the roof Smith asked if this was allowed,
if Dotzenroth would be willing to orient the garage per the Staff recommendation.
Dotzenroth said he would be looking at ice slides. Gaffron noted that this concern could
be eliminated by redesigning the peak of the roof and showed Dotzenroth a sketch how
that could be accomplished.
The issue of the garage entry was discussed. Lindquist said the side entry was a matter of
safety. Dotzenroth did not think this made a difference with the road being at the end of
the point. Smith said it would improve the safety, not only for traffic, but for egress onto
Casco Point and provide parking safety. Dotzenroth asked ifhe had the door for access
but be allowed two on the side. Smith said this would defeat what the Commission was
trying to accomplish.
Hawn said she was concerned with a variance allowing the garage so close to the roadway
when this would not be allowed for others. She does not find the situation to be so unique
as to compel appro\.'.al of the resolution when there is another solution for side entry. She
had no problem with the steeper roof. Smith agreed that the steeper roof would be all
right. Dotzenroth said he would like to measure the distances to see what effect it would
have on the black walnut trees.
There were no public comments.
Lindquist said he preferred the side door entry. Dotzenroth asked ifhe could keep the
concrete apron for guest parking.
11
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 19, 1996
(#6 -#2160 David Dotzenroth -Continued)
Stoddard said he was in favor of the roof line to restore the Victorian look. He noted the
side entry would add about 4% to hardcover. Dotzenroth said he was concerned with
additional hardcover and prefers green.
Smith moved, Lindquist seconded, to recommend approval of the garage addition with the
size of the addition to be maintained below the 1000 s. f limit. The steeper gabled roof
was recommended for approval. The garage doors are to be oriented to the east and
require a new driveway construction. The apron in the right-of-way is to be eliminated.
The exterior construction of the house is to be completed before the garage is begun.
Gaffron noted that the permit is for two years, one year for the exterior and one year for
interior completion. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0.
Dotzenroth was informed that the existing concrete with doors could not remain. Smith
said it was a matter of safety. Hawn noted that cars could still pull in without the concrete
there but the concern of the Commission was for cars being in the roadway. Mrs.
Dotzenroth asked if gravel could be placed where the apron now exists. Gaffron said
gravel constitutes hardcover and grass pavers also were considered hardcover.
Gaffron said the application would be before the Council at their September 9 meeting.
Gaffron informed Dotzenroth that the proposal would be needed prior to the meeting.
Peterson noted that Dotzenroth would have one year from the approval of the variance by
the Council to complete the work.
(#7) #2161 JAMES AND MELISSA EASLEY, 4105 HIGHWOOD ROAD -
VARIANCES -PUBLIC HEARING 8:40-9:05 P.M.
The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted.
The Applicants were present, along with their Architect, Sarah Susanka.
Gaffron reported that the property located on Highwood Road is about 40' wide. The
proposal is to tear down the existing garage, which is located 2' from the right-of-way,
and remove the parking area and stairway down to the house. It will be replaced with a
garage within 3' of the side lot line and 25-30' from the street with parking in front of the
garage. The future conceptual plan is to attach the garage to the house with a walkway
vestibule. The garage and house are to be 3 levels each.
Gaffron noted a height issue with the proposed garage. The defined height is 26' and that
of the house only 19', though 26' from low point to peak The garage is considered an
accessory structure and by definition cannot be of greater height than the house.
12
To:
From:
Subject:
The City of Orono
Pamela & Chuck Plain
David & Jennifer Dotzenroth/ Garage Addition
3225 Casco Circle
August 19, 1996
We have reviewed the Dotzenroth's proposal to enlarge their
garage, and are in full agreement with the concept. Our lot abuts
the Dotzenroth lot to the east side. We are very pleased with the
improvements to their home. Our home is of the same historical
era, and we are happy to see the Dotzenroths maintain the
integrity of the original architectural design, to both their home as
well as their proposed garage enlargement. It is commendable to
see the Dotzenroth's commitment to carry on the historical value
of the original lake homes so that future generations might see
what once existed on Lake Minnetonka.
Thank You
Chuck and Pamela Plain
To: Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members
& Ron Moorse, City Administrator
From: Pat & David Spilseth
3233 Casco Circle
Ref: #2160 David & Jennifer Dotzenroth Garage Improvement/Addition
3225 Casco Circle
August 19, 1996
We have reviewed the Dotzenroth's proposal to enlarge their garage, and are in full
agreement with the concept.
Thank You o~ ... ~
David & Pat Spilseth
To: Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members
& Ron Moorse, City Administrator
From: Kent & Susan Swanson
3229 Casco Circle
Ref: #2160 David & Jennifer Dotzenroth Garage Improvement/Addition
3225 Casco Circle
August 19, 1996
We have reviewed the Dotzenroth's proposal to enlarge their garage, and are in full
agreement with the concept.
Thank You
Susan & Kent Swanson
CITY of ORONO
August 6, 1996
David Dotzenroth
3225 Casco Circle
Wayzata, MN 55391
Street Address:
2750 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356
Municipal Offices
Re: Variance application #2160 -proposed garage reconstruction/addition
Dear Mr. Dotzenroth:
Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066
A preliminary review of your application indicates the following information is lacking in order to
complete the review:
1. Survey by Paul Schoborg dated July 28, 1995 does not show the existing garage
setback from the side lot line at the front and rear corners. This information must
be provided by the surveyor, and is critical given that your basic request is for
a side setback variance.
2. Your sketch on the survey indicates a proposed garage addition of 16' x 20.3', which
would yield a final garage size of 38.3' x 20.3' or 777 s.f. However, your 'proposed
hardcover' worksheet indicates a new garage area of 1,000 s.f. And, the elevation
views of the existing garage don't help clear up this inconsistency because they are
not dimensioned and not to any identifiable scale. Please provide accurate
length and width dimensions of the proposed garage.
3. The proposed plan shows garage doors opening to the street as well as to the side. I
am assuming this is an error, but please confirm for me the proposed location of
all garage doors.
4. The proposed driveway as sketched on the survey is not dimensioned but scales out
to 18'x20' in front of the garage and a 9' wide entry to the street, for a total of about
450 s.f. The driveway dimension proposed on the hardcover calculations is 1 0'x30'
or 300 s.f. Because you are not overextended on your hardcover allowance
based on the information provided, I would expect you would construct a driveway
somewhat larger, perhaps in the 800-1000 s.f. range to accomodate maneuvering and
off-street parking. Please refine your proposed driveway plans and provide
dimensions and a scale diagram for the driveway.
Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510
David Dotzenroth
August 6, 1996
Page 2
5. Your application form did not include a hardship statement. This is also a critical
item, since Planning Commission will want to know why you can't relocate the
garage to a conforming location (15' from the street lot line, 15' from the side lot line
for a garage of 750-1000 s.f. area) given that you apparently will be doubling its size
and rebuilding the entire roof system. Please provide a statement describing undue
hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing
compliance with Zoning Code requirements.
All of the above information is required in order for your application to be considered as complete,
and must be submitted no later than Tuesday August 13 in order for this item to remain on the
August 19th Planning Commission agenda. Please call me at 473-7357 if you have any questions.
Michael P. Gaffron
Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator
encl.
Application #
Date Received
Amount Paid
CITY OF ORONO -VARIAN CE APPLICATION
Initial Application Fee $220.00
($50.00 per each additional variance) # ~
Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 tt J:l
(no change from original application) ~
Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00
After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee)
PROPERTY INFORMATION
SiteAddress 3.;).;;t,5 C..Ct.6c...o ~~-c-d'€.e Wo...~-z...o---\-c-dTY\IQ 55~91
Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) blb-\ \ 7-j.3 S-13 oo a..J
Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey.
Date Pr~cquired-~~-..... / -'-'f~7~q ____________ (montb/year)
I (do)~ also oJ.lithe adjacent parcels of land.
· Present use of property: X residential __ other (specify) ____ =->--<....__.._......__,,,>-+-_
ZoningDistrict: t\e..\'Y\ o~ o fM :c/7 l-97/t, Cs
~ 7s?-61/£YB
APPLIC~T Phone (home) 41 l -CZ, l ?-, ")
Name J)a..: ,~ s:~ J)oJ: :Le vw·o±\o Phone(work) _______ _
Address::,SJ..';}..S C4,.5c o (2.hcd e City: w £>--y 7.cA±A Zip: 5:S ~':\I
OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) _______ _
Name________________ Phone (work) _______ _
Address: ____________ City: _______ ~ Zip: ___ _
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construe~ Cost$ i i_,,o c, ;;.!
Describe request in detail: .S (!>..._-\-l..._ M&. !,..i co/) -~ qc .. ~A.-~
(attach additional sheets if necessary)
VARIAl~CES REQUIRED
Lot Area
X Setback: Front
Lot Width
}('Side
Hardcover
Rear
-----~-
__ Lot Coverage
Average Lakeshore
.L~ .......... SHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS
Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing
compliance. with Zoning Code requirements=--------'------'--------
(attach additional sheets if necessary)
7
HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET
SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' ~i5-i250' ·. 250-500' 500-1000'
EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE
A. House
-Pc\'Ll)
lJJ D<>J. ~~:::,
I 9f;5·'-Aa'9-•t"'
B. Garage
Length
X
X
X
X
X
C. Driveway ______ x
~ . X
Width
D. Sidewalk t 1:>r4 ~ x -ro ~ l?.aan =8,-1-~ f½ sp-,J~a
E. Patio/Deck _____ x
F. Landscape
Underlain
By Plastic
X
X
X
X
G. Other -;,. ~!) I x --'--'-\ ___ _
sNLM 8 ~ B
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
TOT AL HARDCOVER IN ZONE o -
TOT AL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE L/ /, °c; {,,S---
A 3 3 I; ' B .;2. 7. SB o · x 100 =
PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE
A. Hoo~ _____ x
Length
B. Garage .2@,
IF ··~" w-e...~'\O <'.:.o-n<~-a -~ C. Driveway ---.)
To Cw>-,'1 ,v,0-, . , n Q_ --=---* NO VI (-'rN~ ~
D. Sidewalk
E. Patio/Deck
-F. Landscape
Underlain
By Plastic
G. Other ~\:£ i
-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
TOT AL HARDCOVER IN ZONE
=
Width
=
=
=
=
10 =
=
=
=
=
=
=
\ , =
A
TOT AL PROJERTY AREA IN ZONE 0 41/oY. + BJ.-J5so·x100 =
13
il " c.~' __ -_..::O=='-----S.F.~{_\~
--·=6_-_-__ S.F. Bi~
-?5 -S.F.
__t"-f--1-7..,,.~ ~ S.F.
"'i.o 3 3 l 7. 1 -F.
J._ 7 58b o S.F .
• 1b.03 % %
I~ 85, Ca _____ S.F.
---+--'-".G-:---S.F.
----1----'~=-S.F.
-S.F.
----'-->C..-S.F. __ -_o_-__ S.F.
__ -_o=-----S.F. __ -_o_-__ S.F.
__ -......::...o_-__ S.F.
__ -_o~---S.F.
__ -....::o::...-___ S.F.
tJ 7. o S.F.
. (, J./ -0 4· · 4./ tc-4. _ S.F.
:;_7 5Bo,t>S.F.
,/510 ~,:, %
A
A
B
., ,
, .J ., ...
.... ·t, 1.,. :: .,,,,, :
• •i
.c11sco c1ect.e
(,,-/?J.~O I
q,f, ~ ol
~
((-1)~
o.'>i ~
~
;
,~ ,,. -.... ..
• I
t I
\. ... .,'
.-. -, .. •, \
, .
... : f ' • • I .
\ f
~-✓ ,.,,.,,
, .
I
' . ----~· ,' ....... ,. . --
I ,,4 It#.) II{) t? ,€" // j/ E,
{ViJC rco)
-.. :-..... _---1 ----~---;--~.~·----~
__ --+---
--
', (:.__·~-· -i-------·. / ,·,-,
I . /
' .. ~,,.
I
\
\ --/:fb..9,
,,___ -----
--
\
\
, I
.·.,
'. I . -, ·: ... , ... ~,,
1
I
_J_J
_J_J
_J_J
□
/\'
/..-:0 '. ,:<-':_\
.~· ,\ L>
_J_J
_J_J
_J_J
CITY of ORONO
TELECOPY COVER LETTER
Please deliver the following page(s) to:
Name:
From:
Total number of pages
letter.
Date:
including this cover
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL US AS SOON AS
POSSIBLE.
Phone: (612) 473-7358 and ask for:
our telecopy number is: (612) 473-0510
Additional Message:
,:----
CITY of ORONO
TELECOPY COVER LETTER
Please deliver the following page(s) to:
Name:
From:
Total number of pages
letter.
Date:
[?'Jt:X L-/J/ -$ 7&~
including this cover
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL US AS SOON AS
POSSIBLE.
Phone: (612) 473-7358 and ask for:
Our telecopy number is: (612) 473-0510
Additional Message:
t
--bo k. --_
-----~ rr,f _ ~
·-----.,..-----~-~ ~~ $8~ ve.::, ,A_(~ ~s 7't,,#4N
-------e-----+,,,---_s~ IN ~blr aF____c~ M'IA_ ~-.__;
___ __._.. __ -fAAA11J(:,-~r. Ivo ry--(N f'~---------~-,
_ -~~ G.u1t.:r LN __ l~!io.s 7
_ -----~~~vo~ 0:/)t,C.y--"°CD_ f»-t/t:> ~ ~_.o_,___~----,
~~ ~~7) 0 -~~c..=-;..•-----------1
___ U~gl~'---~ ~ /6 e>O s( ..
-~ ~ L'OL~JAJG, ~S77~G. t)c:cs~S
Mf)V'--.56 1'-Mr1 ~t' ~~ ~~'-'u-ar:--____ _ ---
---~ !7019 -
----;-,,---~--STA--11 v-,)1_-r;.I-/~ J_Cre>o'_
-----1-,-~-C~T.i l-,tr/~/2,~-9rM-/N t--o7r /\-JO...,-/r ~
.--~:~g_ ~ s~ ~ ~ gs t:)(IS77JJ6 __ _
~ V f~ ~-~~ _ 0N ~~~~/1\j ~
~ l~ I~ 7"""b 'be7z:> ~-~ ovlif<-__
Ai:--. )
__ ___,,...----r---_ f'i,il-Pb ~WV. u. L e:...e:.k:2.::Ln~~f::J~L~ ~ s w~ 1 rs _
---~------~ ~~~ ~ J>-1~ ~r.e ---
___ [ ~ J::~v~ Jf~~~fhPs ___ ·_. · __
---~ --_g_~ ~. Q~~~---
-----------------------
-~---------------
--------------------------------
948 .. 6
X
955. 1
X
931 • 7
931 • 5
X
CITY OF ORONO
2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
Phone (612)473-7357 Fax 473-0510
.tf.QI!.Q.g
The Planning Commission will hold the
following public hearings in the Counc il
Chambers at 2780 Kelley Parkway on
· Monday, August 19, 1996 for the purpose of
reviewing the following land use applications:
1. #2 159 James and Joann Jundt of 1400
Brackens Point Road request hardcover and
lakeshore setback variances for restoration
work to an existing boathouse, grotto,
reta ini ng wall and walkways located within the
0-75 ' lakeshore setback area .
2 . #2160 David Dotzenroth of 3225 Casco
Circle requests side and street setback
variances for 0-construction of -an additioncs to,.
the existing detached garage. ·
3. #2161 James and Melissa Easley of 4105
Highwood Road request _a variance for
hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback
area, a variance for lot coverage by
structures, and variances to side and street
setback requ ire ments to allow construction of
a new detached garage to replace their
existing detached garage .
4 . #2162 Michael McEnany and Debbie
Williamson, the applicants, req uest a number
of variances for the Richard J. Olson property
at 3115 North Shore Drive , inc ludi ng
lakeshore setback, average lakeshore
setback, 0-75 ' hardcov er, side setback, lot
area and lot width variances to allow
construction of a new residence to replace
the existing residence on the propert{. The
proposed new residence will be con:itructed
within the existing building footprint.
5 . #2163 Larry and Sharon Gehl of 1825
Concordia Street request lakeshore setback,
average lakeshore setback and hardcover
variances to construct an open deck area
above the exi st i ng porch which is located
within the 0-75 ' lakeshore setback zone .
6 . #2164 Douglas J . Olson of 2601 West
Lafayette Road requests 0-75' and 75-250 '
hardcover variances and an average
lakes hore setback va rian ce for constr uction
of additions to the existing residence.
7. #2166 Janet Kiernan , owner of the
property at 1491 Shoreline Dri ve. requests
lakeshore setback, average lakeshore
setback, side setback, and 0-75' and 75-250'
hardcover var iance s for co nstruc ti on of
additions to the existing residence and
expansion of the ex isting detached garage .
The application also includes relocation of the
e).\isting driveway access to the property.
.,8. ~167 Allen and Judy Schefers, owners of
··· ·the vacant lot at 2540 Casco Po int Road ,
request a variance for construct ion of a new
single family _residence partially within a
designated flood plain area . Th e site plan as
proposed also requires a 75-250 ' hardcover
variance.
The meeti ng commences at 7:00 p.m . All
persons wishing to be heard will appear at
this meeting . Written comments are so licited .
Plans are available in the City of fi ces for
review, by appointment.
City of Orono
By : Planning Commission
Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning &
Zoning Administrator
(Published in The La ker and Pion ee r August .
3, 1996)
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.
8.) The printed bi@tJ 4f /u:Jic4 j
(/
which is attached was cut from the columns of said
newspaper, and wis printed and published once
each week for ___ successive weeks:
It was first published Monday,
~A-( a, f 0/ the ', " day of'Ji/i/4 19 iJL,
and was thereafter prirfted and published every
Monday, to and including Monday,
the ___ day of / 19 llrfl/c -
Authorized Agent
Subscribed and sworn to me on this
By :
1'RISTI HOLM
NO':,~• euauC-MINNESOTA
MY Cu MM. EXPIRES 1-31-2000
Rate In orma 10n
(1) Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users
for comparable space : $12 .20 per inch.
(2) Maximum rate allowed by law for above matter: $12.20.
(3) Rate actually charged for above matter: $7 .00 per inch.
Each additional successive week: $5.05.
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ss .
CITY OF ORONO
I, Jamie Bosma, of the City of Orono, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public Hearing
concerning the matter of #2160 was mailed to the attached list
of property owners.
In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal
this 2nd day of August, 1996 .
Jamie Bq_¢ma
CITY OF ORONO
2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, l\'IN 55323
Phone (612)473-7357 Fax 473-0510
NOTICE
The Planning Commission will hold the following public hearings in the Council Chambers at
2780 Kelley Parkway on Monday, August 19, 1996 for the purpose of reviewing the following
land use applications: ·
1. #2159 James and Joann Jundt of 1400 Bracketts Point Road request hardcover and
lakeshore setback variances for restoration work to an existing boathouse, grotto, retaining
wall and walkways located within the 0-75' lakeshore setback area.
2. #2160 David Dotzenroth of 3225 Casco Circle requests side and street setback variances
for construction of an addition to the existing detached garage.
3. #2161 James and Melissa Easley of 4105 Highwood Road request a variance for
hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback area, a variance for lot coverage by structures,
and variances to side and street setback requirements to allow construction of a new
detached garage to replace their existing detached garage.
4. #2162 Michael McEnany and Debbie Williamson, the applicants, request a number of
variances for the Richard J. Olson property at 3115 North Shore Drive, including
lakeshore setback, average lakeshore setback, 0-75' hardcover, side setback, lot area and
lot width variances to allow construction of a new residence to replace the existing
residence on the property. The proposed new residence will be constructed within the
existing building footprint.
5. #2163 Larry and Sharon Gehl of 1825 Concordia Street request lakeshore setback,
average lakeshore setback and hardcover variances to construct an open deck area above
the existing porch which is located within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone.
6. #2164 Douglas J. Olson of 2601 West Lafayette Road requests 0-75' and 75-250'
hardcover variances and an average lakeshore setback variance for construction of
additions to the existing residence.
7. #2166 Janet Kiernan, owner of the property at 1491 Shoreline Drive, requests lakeshore
setback, average lakeshore setback, side setback, and 0-75' and 75-250' hardcover
variances for construction of additions to the existing residence and expansion of the
existing detached garage. The application also includes relocation of the existing driveway
access to the property.
1
8. #2167 Allen and Judy Schefers, owners of the vacant lot at 2540 Casco Point Road,
request a variance for construction of a new single family residence partially within a
designated flood plain area. The site plan as proposed also requires a 75-250' hardcover
variance.
The meeting commences at 7:00 p.m. All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this meeting.
Written comments are solicited. Plans are available in the City offices for review, by
appointment.
City of Orono
By: Planning Commission
Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator
To be published the week of August 5, 1996.
2
CITY of ORONO
Municipal Offices
Street Address: Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 66 2750 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066
DAT A 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.
UCL). c9--A--~ O\ 2-en,c-o-\""
First Middle Last
~~~s ~sc_o t_,~~ ~·
Address
luf>-~-z.._t~t-1\J /V'\tU :55.?:H l
City State Zip
I understand my rights as stated above.
~~ ~' ~
Signature
Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510
10
.Lfll-Bl
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 propertv 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 sho\Vll 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 sho\Vll 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 data, including recipients named by the individual; or (b) notify the individual that
he believes the data to be correct. Data in dispute shall be disclosed only if the individual's
statement of disagreement is included with the disclosed data.
The determination of the responsible authority may be appealed pursuant to the
provisions of the administrative procedure act relating to contested cases.
11