Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Project Packet
CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 612-249-4600 ZONING FILE# 01-2677 NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: 6/18/2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Terry and Dorothy Erwin 2715 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variances COPIES: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 6/11/2001 VOTE: 5 FOR O AGAINST ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COUNCIL ACTION -MOTION: To approve per the findings and conditions of the resolution previously mailed to you. Please arrange to sign the 3 original resolution copies at the City Offices (Monday through Thursday 7:30 AM-5:00 PM and Friday 7:30 AM-11:30 AM). All persons with an interest in the property must sign the resolutions. You must apply for and obtain a permit prior to the commencement of construction. (The permit application is separate application from the zoning variance application). Variance Approval is limited to the extent shown on the 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 June 11, 2002. 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. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, JUNE It, 2001 4. #01-2676 Baywind Christian Church, Amendment to Municipal Code Section 10.42-Continued Flint moved, and Nygard seconded, to amend the B-4 Zoning District to allow "Churches" as a conditional use, referring the matter back to the Planning Commission for further discussion, and directed staff to draft an ordinance that adds "Churches" as a conditional use to the B-4 Zoning District. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *5. #01-2677 Terry and Dorothy Envin, 2715 Casco Point Road-Variances Resolution No. 4662 Sansevere moved, and White seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4662 granting variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C)(6) to permit alteration to the foundation and existing residence, including replacement of the second story of the existing house and refurbishing of the interior of the main level of the house, within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka and average lakeshore setback; Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(L)(l) to permit replacement of a 360 s.f. patio, where a 520 s.f. patio exists within 75' of the lakeshore; Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 to permit alteration to the existing house 5.9' to Jhe north property line where 10' is required; and Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 to permit future relocation of the existing storage building 5' from the side property line. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 6. #01-2678 Kristi Roesler, 1169 Elmwood Avenue--Variances-Resolution No. 4660 Gaffron stated that the resolution before Council denied requested lot area and width variances for the lakeshore parcel, and approved the variance to allow an accessory structure on said lot, subject to execution of a Special Lot Combination. He asked Council to consider whether any specific conditions should be incorporated into the Special Lot Combination. Council agreed to allow the requested dock on the lot, and if the applicant wa~ted to add any other structures, they would have to come back with a formal application. Use of the lot would be kept as limited as possible because there is no primary structure on the lot. Flint moved, and White seconded to adopt Resolution No. 4660 denying variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5(B) requesting lot area and lot width variances for lot 7, and granting variances to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(A) to allow Special Lot Combination to allow for the permanent use of Lot 7 for lake access for 1169 North Arm Drive, including the ability to construct a dock on Lot 7 without a principal structure. · Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1 (Nygard). 5 Completion Date: Deadline: 4/6/01 8/4/01 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Item Description: #01-2677 Terry and Dorothy Erwin 2715 Casco Point Road Variances DATE: June 5, 2001 ITEM NO.: Agenda Section: Zoning Zoning District: LR-lC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) List of Exhibits: A Resolution B Draft Planning Commission Minutes (May 21, 2001) C Planning Report (May 16, 2001) Application Summary The applicants propose to renovate and refurbish the existing house. The renovations include some work to the existing foundation and removal of the second floor and to replace with a new floor plan. All of the proposed renovation would be within the existing foundation. The building envelope would be expanded in two areas, one over the existing den and another over the existing dining room. The house encroaches into the average lakeshore setback and within the 75' lakeshore setback. The structural work to the foundation within 75' of the lakeshore and the average setback requires variances. No expansion of the existing house is proposed within required setbacks. Planning Commission/Staff Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended by a vote of 4 to Oto approve variances to permit restructuring the foundation below the front porch to accommodate a foundation depth of 42" and to permit the replacement of the second story of the house, with the understanding the walls will remain for the first level of the existing home and variances to permit the homeowners to replace an outdoor patio for a 360 s.f. patio (a net reduction of 160 s.f.), in hardcover within the 75' setback, subject to removal of 800 s.f. of driveway and parking space in the 75-250' setback. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt or amend the attached resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1; SECTION 10.56, SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) (1) SUBDIVISION 16 (C) (6) AND SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE NO. #01-2677 WHEREAS, Terry Erwin and Dorthy Erwin, (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 2715 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and is legally described as follows: Lot 5, Auditor's Subdivision No. 265, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 21, 2001, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicant applied to the City of Orono for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) ( 6) to permit alteration to the foundation and existing residence, including replacement of the second story of the existing house and refurbishing of the interior of the main level of the house, within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka and average lakeshore setback; Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) to permit replacement of a 360 s.f. patio, where a 520 s.f. patio exists within 75' of the lakeshore; Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 to permit alteration to the existing house 5. 9' to the north property line where 1 0' is required; and Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 to permit future relocation of the existing storage building 5' from the side property line. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #01-2677. Page 1 of 5 2. The property is located in the LR-IC(½ acre) One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 21, 200 I and recommended approval on a vote of 4 to O for variances based upon the following findings and hardships: A. The site topography challenges any substantial rev1S1ons to the house location. The steep slope to the road dictates results in the need for a long driveway, and significant site regrading and alteration of drainage patterns in the immediate neighborhood would be necessary to move the house to a location where hardcover standards could be met. Renovation of the existing house, with no expansions where it encroaches required setbacks, would appear to be a reasonable approach. B. The existing structure is a legal non-conforming structure that was built prior to the current zoning ordinances. C. No further expansion of the non-conformities (setbacks) would occur. The expansions are being completed within the required setbacks. D. A 520 s.f. patio exists on the lakeside of the existing residence. The patio must be removed to permit excavating for the repair to the foundation. A total of approximately 160 s.f. of hardcover must be removed around the foundation to access the footings. The 160 s.f. is not permitted to be replaced as it constitutes hardcover within 75' of the lakeshore. A smaller patio, 360 s.f., would replace the existing patio. E. A storage building is located on the north property line. The applicants recognize the building will require future repairs. Repairs also require a variance to relocate the building. A 5' variance would permit the building to relocated and meet a minimum setback of 5' to the property line. Page 2 of 5 F. Applicants agree to remove 800 s.f. of hardcover from the ex1stmg driveway and parking area within the 75-250' setback. Total hardcover to be removed from the property is 800 s.f. from the driveway and parking area, 160 s.f. from the patio and 187 s.f. of landscape plastic for a total reduction of 1,147 s.f. G. Variances to permit replacement of the second story are approved with a finding this project is a remodel and not a rebuild. Less than 50% of the living space within the existing structure is being removed as part of the remodeling (No area within an existing basement or crawl space would be considered as living space). The walls and structure below the second story removal will remain. 4. 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 variances 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. 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. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) (6) to permit alteration to the foundation and existing residence, including replacement of the second story of the existing house and refurbishing of the interior of the main level of the house, within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka and average lakeshore setback; Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) to permit replacement of a 360 s.f. patio, where a 520 s.f. patio exists within 75' of the lakeshore; Page 3 of 5 Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 to permit alteration to the existing house 5.9' to the north property line where 10' is required; and Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 to permit future relocation of the existing storage building 5' from the side property line, subject to the following conditions: 1. Required hardcover removal, noted above, and relocation of the shed are completed prior to applicants requesting a final inspection. A final survey and site plan shall be submitted to the City of Orono indicating final hardcover removals prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. No removal of the exterior walls below the second floor are approved as part of this variance approval, any request to restructure or replace any first floor walls will require further variance review by the City of Orono. 3. Applicants shall submit a final drainage plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. 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 (June 11, 2002). 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. The undersigned applicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 4 of 5 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 11th day of June, 2001. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner ( s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 11th day of June, 2001 by Barbara A. Peterson and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) On this __ day of ________ , 20_ 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 5 of 5 Application Date: Deadline: 4 /6/01 6/5/01 TO: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner DATE: May 16 , 2001 SUBJECT: #01 -2677 Terry and Dorothy Erwin 2715 Casco Point Road Variances Zoning District: LR-1 C One Family Lakeshore Residential District ( 1/2 acre) List of Exhibits: A Application B Variance Application Addendum and Statements of Hardship C Plat Map D Photo -Streetside E Photo -Lakeside F Photo -Shed G Proposed Street Elevation H Proposed Lakeside Elevation I Proposed South Elevation J Proposed North Elevation K Main Floor Plan L Second Floor Plan M Hardcover Calculation Worksheets N Survey/Site Plan 0 Survey Indicating Setbacks/Encroachments P Property Owners Notification List Summary of Request: The applicants propose to renovate and refurbish the existing house. The renovations include some work to the existing foundation and removal of the second floor and replace with a new floor plan. All of the proposed renovation would be within the existing foundation. The building envelope would be expanded in two areas , one over the existing den and another over the existing dining room. The areas of the expanded house are highlighted on the elevation views attached to this report. It is not entirely clear from the information that has been provided where the foundation work will be required. The house encroaches into the average lakeshore setback and within the 7 5' lakeshore setback. Any structural work within 75' of the lakeshore and the average setback requires variances. #01-2677 Terry and Dorothy Erwin 2715 Casco Point Road Page I of4 q This application requires the following setback variances: • Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) and Section 10.56, Subdivision 15 (C) (6) To permit alteration to structure within 75' of the lakeshore and the average lakeshore setback. • Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit structural work to the house within the 10' side yard setback. Additionally, variances should be approved to permit the structural work to the foundation. The applicants have submitted their Description of Request and Hardships statements. They are attached as Exhibit B. Setbacks: The property is located on Casco Point and is located within the LR-1 C zoning district. Required setbacks in the district are (Section 10.25, Subdivision 6): Street Side Lakeshore Required 30' 10' 75' Actual 211.1' 10.8' south lot line -5.9' north lot line 66' Average Lakeshore The house encroaches 5' into the average setback at the southwest corner. There is relatively no change to the building envelope within the 1 O' setback encroachment on the north side of the house. Primarily, the areas where changes occur meet the required 1 O' setback. A second story will be expanded above the single level. No variances would be required to expand the second level living areas up to the 1 O' setback, as proposed. One concern with the proposal is the expanded roofline to the north side of the applicants house that may effect sunlight and drainage to the adjacent property. (Another factor contributing to potential drainage issues is the total existing hardcover on the property.) The changes to the house within the lakeshore setbacks would not expand the building within those areas. The mass of the house would increase due to the second-story protrusions over the existing den and another over the dining room. Again, neither would be encroaching into any required setback. Hardcover 0-75 75-250 250-500 1,132 s.f. (23%) -145 s.f. (landscape plastic) 987 s.f. (20%) 6,316 s.f. (55%) -42 s.f. (landscape plastic) 6,274 s.f. (55%) 1,656 s.f. (26%) #01-2677 Terry and Dorothy Erwin 2715 Casco Point Road Page 2 of 4 A large portion of the existing site hardcover is due to the very large parking area between the driveway and house. The surface of the parking area is a red rock surfaced pad with average dimension of 7 5' X 50'. In many instances when variances have been requested hardcover reductions have been required even at times when no hardcover variances have been applied for. Based on the fact some foundation work will be required with this project it could be argued standards should apply for new construction. Under "new construction" the new house would be required to meet the current zoning standards. Current standards would relocate the house to meet setbacks and the lot could not exceed the hardcover limits. The lot does require a lengthy driveway as the building area of the lot is located significantly lower than the elevation of Casco Point Road. No area located along the hillside is usable for structures or parking areas. It would not be entirely reasonable to remove all of the parking area. A turn around should be provided to avoid having to back up the hill. No parking is permitted along Casco Point Road so parking should be made available on site. A photo of the shed located on the north property line is attached. The shed will require repair at some time in the near future. Construction of the shed was prior to the adoption of the current zoning standards and is located within the side setback and within 1 O' of another structure. The applicants should be asked about the future of the shed and/or if the shed is to be removed or relocated. Issues for Discussion: 1. The house is non-conforming as it is located within required setbacks. The property owners had two options to consider; remodel the existing house which requires the removal and replacement of the second story and some structural work to the foundation or remove the existing residence and build new. They have chosen to remodel and renovate. Is the proposed foundation work of such a magnitude that this project should meet the standards for new construction? 2. If variances are granted should some hardcover be removed from the site to reduce the total hard surface on the property. 3. What is the future of the shed? Should it be relocated ifrepairs are required? 4. The applicants and contractor should provide evidence to indicate if the foundation work is necessary to allow the replacement and expansion of the second story or if the foundation work would be required if not expanding the house. Will the house have to be raised off the foundation to do the necessary work? How much of the foundation will be replaced? #01-2677 Terry and Dorothy Erwin 2715 Casco Point Road Page 3 of4 Staff Recommendation: Staff concurs that the site topography challenges any substantial revisions to the house location. The steep slope to the road dictates results in the need for a long driveway, and significant site regrading and alteration of drainage patterns i the immediate neighborhood would be necessary to move the house to a location where hardcover standards could be met. Renovation of the existing house, with no expansions where it encroaches required setbacks, would appear to be a reasonable approach. In reviewing the applicant's hardship statement, please note that the 75' setback and hardcover requirements are City concerns, not just DNR standards. The DNR has established a 50' setback for Lake Minnetonka, but the City has required 75' since October, 1973. Orono's hardcover ordinance is, by design, more restrictive than that of the DNR. Staff recommends approval of variances to allow renovations and remodeling of the house conditioned upon the following: 1. Applicant must demonstrate and confirm the foundation work is not required only to allow the expansion of the second story, but would be needed even if no expansion was planned. 2. Hardcover removals within the parking area should be required to provide additional absorption areas on the property. 3. No expansion of the building envelope shall be permitted within required setbacks. The recommendation is based on the following findings and hardships: 1. The existing structure is a legal non-conforming structure that was built prior to the current zoning ordinances. 2. No further expansion of the non-conformities (setbacks) would occur. The expansions are being completed within the required setbacks. Applicants Statements of Hardship Are attached as page B2. #01-2677 Terry and Dorothy Erwin 2715 Casco Point Road Page 4 of 4 CITY OF ORONO -VARIAN CE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address -Z.11S ~ -t'C>IN"f f.ofrr:, Application # ~ 1 ~ Date Received/ 18] I Amount Paid -lt,e}€l). Qi) Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Z,t)-111-Z.'3-2.?>-00 0G Attach legal description to application if not included on required· survey. D·ate Property Acquired_M_b_Vf>_-r--'-,_l"i_~_,-'--____________ (month/year) · I (do~ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Prese'nfuseofproperty: X residential __ other (specify) _________ _ Zoning District: (ZE?\ DENt\A;:l, APPLICANT Name "1\S\~R'( ~ 'Q:?(2{,tY.'( ~\r--.} Phone (home) --------Phone (work) _______ _ Address: '2.. i IS c./J5w R>\ts\ FoPn:> City: · oa:.otJo Zip: 55°3:f l O\VNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) -------- Name 5~e. Phone (work) -------- Address: ------------City: ________ Zip: ___ _ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Soo,t)(){)-t Describe request in detail: fa)OVf\!E /Wv ~(1..0lstf At-J 5/:JS.11Nb NON --lo~1rJC:. ¼-\C½G (?££ f'rt"'f ¥t,\e? l>(D~M) . (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width X' Hardcover Setback: Front X Side Rear L Other (specify) °?S1 OttWM ~~ SE=fS~ _._Lot Coverage X Average Lakeshore HARDSIDP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions prevent_ing compliance with Zo~g Code requirements: tz~ ~11\-%:D ~vaj (attach additional sheets if necessary) (6 A - CITY OF ORONO -VARIANCE APPLICATION ADDENDUM TO APPLICATION FOR: Dorothy and Terry Erwin Residence 2715 Casco Point Road, Orono, MN 55391 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST History & Current Situation Application # [Addendum] The applicant has lived in the house on this property since August of 1987. It is a relatively small parcel, long but very thin. The street-side portion of the lot has a large slope from Casco Point Road down to the current house and shed, making driving treacherous in the winters, and all but eliminating the possibility ofa garage or shed up on the hilled area. As the slope of the hill begins to taper, the minimal driveway widens to provide tum-around space in front of the garage and shed areas. The current house is situated in a location that is somewhat hanging into both the neighboring line of sight setback as well as the 75 foot setback from the Lake Minnetonka Ordinary High Water Mark. Because of the extreme drop in grade as well as the narrowness of the lot, the hardcover calculations are understandably well over the ordinance guidelines. The portion from 0-75 ft is at 23.0 % (including 297.1 square feet of the house), the portion from 75-250 feet is at 55.5%, and the portion from 250-out is at 26.6%. Proposed Project The applicant has developed a design to renovate and refurbish the existing house in the location in which it sits now. Plans and elevations are attached with this submission, that demonstrate the plan as outlined below: 1. We will utilize the current 2221-square-foot footprint of the house to develop the renovations. No additional hardcover will be created because of the plan. 2. We plan to refurbish the main level and upper level areas that are currently projecting into the line of sight and high-water setback areas by installing new windows, siding, roof shingles and stone veneer. The existing envelope of the house will be maintained in its entirety, with the exception of the upper level shed roof which will be clipped (into a hip-style roof) to reduce further the impact of the hang-over into the setback areas. Portions of the foundation in this area were examined over the winter and were found to vary in depth from 12 to 24 inches below grade. Because of this, we will also underpin these areas to prevent any further ruination of foundation integrity. 3. In the areas of the house outside the sideyard and lakeshore setbacks, we will renovate the main level of the house to include similar ceiling heights as they currently exist. The streetside portion of the main level will include a raised ceiling height in the garage area, as well as the further definition of the "wrap-around" overhang around the garage. Currently, the overhang is above concrete walks on either side of the garage. We will add a cantilevered portion over the front of the garage to tie the two roofs together, creating no additional hardcover because the existing concrete apron and red rock driveway currently qualify the area in front of the garage as hardcover to begin with. 4. The second floor will be removed in its entirety and replaced with a new floor plan that adds character and charm, as well as provides additional ceiling height. Two new second-story protrusions (one over the existing den and another over the existing dining room) will add width to the house at two differing intervals, making the house appear "squattier" than it is, to minimize the impact of the long, narrow and tall floor plan. The new second floor and attic space above it is designed to sit above the current footprint of the house, and it will not require any variances except for the master bedroom and guest room portions, which sit in the same locations they currently do, hanging into the lakeshore setback areas. As noted in item 2 above, the envelope of space in the non-conforming areas will be maintained (and/or reduced) to minimize the impact in the setback areas. #2 =· 7 ·7 HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Unique to the land in question NARROWNESS The current house and property conditions already qualify as non-conforming. The hardcover ordinances are already exceeded in two of the three hardcover zones. This is due to, in large part, to the narrowness (65 foot width) of the lot. With only 11,375 square feet in this zone, the 25% hardcover ordinance allows for only 2843 square feet for house and driveway. If, assuming a new conforming house were to be built at the 75' setback point, an approximately 115 foot driveway would be required to get to the 250-foot setback point. Assuming this driveway would be 12 feet in width (not taking into account a widening at the garage nor a tum-around space), it would result in a minimum of 1380 square feet of hardcover, leaving less than 1500 square feet for the house and garage structure. THE HILL In order to safely utilize the property, it could be argued that the house and garage should not be moved away from the lake towards the street. In order to maintain enough acceleration space to get cars up the driveway to Casco Point Road, it would be undesirable to move the house backwards on the site (as it is already difficult during extreme weather conditions). Moreover, because of the slope of the hill at the street side of the property, it is unrealistic (as well as undesirable) to place a new garage within this area (as it would require lots of treacherous steps and walks to get down to the house area). The benefit would be to have more hardcover available for a new house in the 75-250 foot hardcover zone, but it would be a long and treacherous walk in the winter from the house if this were the case, putting both the owners and guests at risk. Unique to the existing structure location The existing structure is non-conforming. Sitting 70.6 feet from the OHWM, it encroaches into the lakeshore setback, as well as the line-of-sight setback ordinance. Again, because of the extremely narrow property widths in this area of town, it is undesirable to place a house any farther back from the lake than the ordinances allow for. Moving the house back, especially with the Northern neighboring property only 61.4 feet from the OHWM will put significant limitations on the lakeshore view. People in this area chose to live in these homes to "be on the lake." To move the house backwards would in effect put "blinders" upon the view, accentuating the "bowling alley" feel of the property. The house is non-conforming already, and no additional non-conforming elements are being added by the proposal. The house needs updating, structural repairs and a great amount of work on the inside. In order to update the house the way it should, bringing charm and beauty to the neighborhood, there are two options before us: 1. Use the existing footprint, or A good portion of the foundation is in good shape, and the portions that are not can easily be repaired and underpinned. The non-conforming issues will be maintained as they exist today. No additional non-conforming issues will be created by the renovations, and therefore, seem to be an understandable and acceptable route for the project. 2. Tear down the house in its entirety. Ifwe were to pursue this direction, it is assumed that we would be required to meet all of the ordinances established for the property. Mentioned above, if the garage is ·attached and the lakeside view is not negatively impacted by setting the house back, we will be left with a 1200-1500 square-foot footprint for the new house, as well as no opportunity for patio or deck space. If the garage is detached and kept up by the road, a treacherous and long path would be necessary to get to the house, putting an element of unnecessary danger into the mix. 3. Further Arguments The intent of the line-of-sight ordinance is to prevent houses being built closer to the lake than their neighbors, thus cutting peripheral views from neighboring houses dramatically. As noted above, the narrowness of these lots already place import on the western side of the houses as really the only lakeside views. The houses neighboring this house, as well as nearly all the others in this area are oriented directly at the lake, knowing already that decent peripheral views are not attainable. The 75-foot lakeshore setback ordinance, established well after the construction of this house, only slightly displaces the current house footprint. However, the nearly 300 square feet of house that is affected by this ordinance plays a dramatic (and necessary) role in the successful utilization of the house. The effect on the landscape and DNR needs for the 75-foot setback seems somewhat arbitrary (isn't 70.6 feet far enough?). Moreover, in terms of rainwater and re-saturation of the drainfields, allowing the house to be maintained in its current location has no further negative impact on these issues. We are simply leaving the situation as it is. The owners would be perhaps willing to eliminate some areas of patio, walks, and driveways to reduce the amount of hardcover on the property, thus improving the lot, as far as the DNR would be concerned. Unique to the current conditions This property, as noted above, is currently a non-conforming property. The renovations will not create any new hardcover nor encroach any further into lakeshore and line-of-sight setbacks. This is simply a request to allow the current conditions to be maintained in order to refurbish and remodel the existing house. APPLICANTS' LEGAL NAMES Dorothy Leidiger Erwin Terry Alden Erwin wife husband d\0-I 11-a 2 ;, ·~. :-:>::;;,,:_:_;'.;·_ '-----~•_vo_. ,~-----~1 _"IV~ ,:.--- ,, '' ' ' ' '' ,, '' " (2) (3) :, ' ' '' ,, (4) " '' 4 (0 ~ (\J ..... Ji 8 X ,2. 2 D - E --- F --- .. ----~· - \-·~->~ -------. . I § I I§ I § I § I § I I§ H § u r f(l:~r-t:::\_ \~JeJ ' r ~ I J ,____, I II \ ";-I r ..____, I I' 1'-I I ii J 1-----v,LJ I,[, I o::::r: "\ I1 ' """"-c"l 1 'I-! I J >- 1 I I \ I ~~'.fj,~,~~11 I J I >-; I----; I ~ \ :-I ' 1----; I I' 1-----i If--J ~ j . I o:::::i: I I ,:<:J fl:-I , ' 1------;f'l_ I I' 11 1'---I ~~I I 8 l I' '' I,_ I I- I I =---.c.............,..,111 I J~'. '=~ , ,..._ I I\ c...!,J ... I 1-----i I I I IC] .1 'l~~,1 l' ~ I~ IL.I ILJ 'IL__D I I ·.-i ·, I I~ ~ ' I' ··~~II I I I= L... I J r,--ii I ~ l1 ' A I/ II I □ ~~ CB = C] = >-I CB ~ l= ~ - 1111 = "'14 II~ II . ,[] I - ' II ~:. " ', ', ,., ~---:: l lj ! n :\' 'i ; ' . ··-.. ~!-A~.· l---tJE.~-- I . --j D 7 t::.'fZ.WIIJ HAR.lJ,._;QVER CALCULATION \VORKShEET . M I SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) [ 0-75') 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House @) -,.~ (Av) X 40.7 = Z41. l 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 ~. '2-, X 51-= l<t,C,.4 S.F. X = S.F. E. Patio/Deck 41.o X \r;.z_ = b1.; .'2,. S.F. .... 7.c; X I?. g (Av) = r-t o~. I J S.F. . F. Landscape z. X 2-= 4,.o S.F. Underlain (..,. (., X jc;'. D '19.0 S.F. By Plastic 7 X CD = 42.,. S.F. G. Other (~ X 2 = 4,D S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 11~'2.."=, S.F. A TOTAL PROPER1Y AREA IN ZONE 41-Z.-i.. ·? S.F. B A \1i'l ·Co B 1'1'2-2--~ X 100 = '2..~.o % A ..,. B X 100 = % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE [}lo 4f~1i,5J 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 '} 7 ?==S.F. S.F. X - F. Landscape ~~, S.F . . Underlain X = S.F. By Plastic X = S.F. G. Other X = S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE S.F. A TOT AL PROPER1Y AREA IN ZONE ,s.. \, C, I S.F. B A + B X 100 = % C: 12 HARIJcOVER CALCUL[TIONJVORKSHEET . 6¥2-'MN""' SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House @ 'f-'2..X"\o·1 X ~ 22.1; x2.A.?, = /9*.S S.F. 1 · Leogth 42 )<. 0 .7 Width . <:, .g X ?,3.?:, X --@).-i.i. X? .'l-= (-10.?,) S.F. · '2,.)( ~-~ X = S.F. lj.l,.,C.. z.g.2, X = S.F. q.c;;<. g.7 B. Garage If.:>-<c X l$· '2-= 3.1> '2.. . I S.F. C. Drivewa)@ ?>X '24 x <e3) 32..'?X3S'.4 = ?71e.,.'D S.F. ~ 1">-S'K'2.1.S xi -z.1.sx1c...s = S.F. ~1-SX~8-D ?.IS.11 )(.\4 ,'S D. Sidewalk '2.1,S X s.o = \ '?)'i .c; S.F. '2.<;.o X 4 .) = \oo,o S.F. E. Patio/Deck I .e;, X ?> = 4.e; S.F. ,,-ai:, (7) 2-X 2-"2.8, t, S.F. F. Landscape 1:'L X I . = 12•D S.F. Underlain X = S.F. By Plastic X = S.F. G. Other x· = S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE ~,:;f b.'=, S.F. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 11,s,s.o S.F. B A (p~lb,(.i. + B lt?1S,Q X 100 = · 'GS,'> % A B X 100 = % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE ["10 u-tP\'N C, 6' J A. House X = S.F. Length Width X = S.F. X = S.F. X = S.F. B. Garage X = S.F. C. Driveway 7 S.F. :# S.F. D. Sidewalk S.F. 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~-s] S.F. B A + B X 100 = % 12 HARlJCOVER CALCULATION \VO ,..SHEET. SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other A A Length X X X X X X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE Width 12- \~<;to.o + B '=,-Z.24-o + B ----- PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE x [ No Ll;~&G:: J A. House B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other A Length X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE + B Width ----- = = = = = = = X 100 = X 100 = = = - 7 = = = X 100 = ______ S.F. ______ S.F. ______ S.F. ______ S.F. ______ S.F. fbSb.o S.F. ______ S.F. S.F. ------ ------S.F. S.F. ------ ------S.F. ______ S.F. ______ S.F. ______ S.F. ______ S.F. S.F. A ------~i.2.4-.0 S.F. B ~~-C:, % % ------ S.F. ------ S.F. ------S.F. ------ ------S.F. ______ S.F. .,, S.F. ---=----S.F. ------ ----1----S.F. S.F. ------ ------'---S.F. ______ S.F. S.F. ------ ------S.F. ______ S.F. -.------S.F. I, RUN DATE 04/18/01 BATCH 503 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER ~AME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME 38 20-117-23,23 0002 026ql CASCO POINT RD WILLIAM F HILLER ET AL WILLIAM F HILLER 2691 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0005 02715 CASCO POINT RD T & DERWIN TERRY A & DOROTHY L ERWIN 2715 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 553q1 38 20-117-23 23 0009 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 20-117-23 24 0020 02750 CASCO POINT RD DALE A CHRISTENSEN & WIFE DALE A CHRISTENSEN 2750 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 TAXPAYER TOTAL BATCH 503 00012 NAHE/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 20-117-23 23 0003 02695 CASCO POINT RD JOHN T REDMOND JOHN T REDMOND 2695 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0006 02745 CASCO POINT RD SR PETERSON & KA PETERSON STEVEN R PETERSON 2745 CASCO POINT RD WAYZAT.A MN 55391 38 20-117-23 24 0001 02684 CASCO POINT RD D L RUNKLE & L F RUNKLE DAVID L RUNKLE 2684 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 24 0021 02710 CASCO POINT RD CH & BJ PALMER CURTIS H & BARBARA J PALMER 2710 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 # REPORT NO. PI43540l 38 20-117-23 23 0004 02697 CASCO POINT RD A & C KANE A LAWRENCE KANE 2697 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0007 02755 CASCO POINT RD D S & J BREITNER DAVIDS & JANA BREITNER 2755 CASCO PT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 PAGE 4 38 20-117-23 24 001q 02750 CASCO POINT RD DALE A CHRISTENSEN & WIFE DALE A CHRISTENSEN 2750 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN . 55391 38 20-117-23 24 0022 92700 CASCO POINT RD DP BUESING & LR RUNNING DANIEL BUESING/LINDA RUNNING 2700 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 r '9 l .,.. (\/ \~~ ~;; ', /'' t~':\\ d,'.i) 1:;01S).>c., .\ ,,r _,_,. '.\ ,·; '~ v7~•.:•l•· ... ,, 4r~ \;, 1--u .-, ;, ,to oi N Cl) I . - DWELLING I I I l ~ -----1----•u-----------~~~~~ i I /; L-U I J 'cr-l ~ Cl OF' PROPERTY LINE ------. /I I ,,c:_,,l-I / f ~: : CORNER OF SHED is 0.14-' 'NORTI-f /~ ~o!'i ~ . ', s ~1& : N 69"26'51" W , .,,.--/ 29.2.i: --..... -·-f!J/ --323.11--'~,"""""'"'"""""-o::;.~~ rr ROCK PlUAR-.1 I w I ~ '! ,_ I ..,,.. I") -co ~uj,~ ;.... (0::, C\J I ----:z I I ---- 28.5± /" !--~ ~~-70.6-___ _ \l,€.\• -R-oel- __ .,,. FOU'r.1tr-1• IRON PIPE (flT PLAT DISTANCE FROM lHE NORTHERLY 8.0<_,., ' LINE t\"" LOT 134 SPRING PARK ~lHIN 0.05' FEET) I I r I --I I --I \ \ \ \ \.. -2' X :i' CONCRETE STEPS '--~A LINE 275.0 FEET SOUlHWESTERLY I.Nfl PARALl£1.. TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 134 SPRING PARK. ----_/ ;-----.,,"77::"'7?~"'..,...,..., __ ( I I I I I I I I I EXISTING DWELLING "'-1.1 --330.49- s 69"28'15" E I L- /JI U I r~ )i ! _( ----_) er-_) C\; r-a ~ ') '-.-- ~ ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ," I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I I I N ~ B\TUM\NOUS ..,. .,; N a, I f t.XISTING DWELLING I L - -----r----~~-----------~~-~~-~~~~~"~~"~ '--1 2a,5 ± __ ,,,. FOU~1• IRON PIPE (FIT PLAT DISTANCE FROM TiiE NORTiiERLY : LINE OF LOT 134 SPRING PARK YtlTiilN 0.05' FEET) / ~ --------f Ji -------···---I ., I --------! . ---- I I I I I I I ( I I I ' EXISTING DWELLING ' ' ' '----A LINE 275.0 FlET SOUTH~STERLY i'.Nfl PARAllil.. TO THE SOU1HERLY LINE OF LOT 134 SPRING PARK . p !l :_t:Jh -•; . /f . //_.·~ .. . · ,L,,.. .,t....:. .• . , I ·· . . , .. . I B17VMINOUs l DR/I~ .. I •c.n'AY --330.49- s 69"28'15" E I L - .<"'~) f./ '~·· .,. .. :-_7 /11 L/1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I~ I I I I I I I I I Bl1\JM1NOL' MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 21 , 2001 (#01-2679 SHARRATT AND MACDONALD DESIGN COMPANY, CONTINUED) Smith inquired whether the Applicants had any comments or concerns about that restrictive covenant. Moorse stated they would need to speak with the property owner regarding that, but that he does not have any intentions of selling or subdividing the property at this time . Smith inquired whether the Applicants would like the Planning Commission to act on their application tonight or table it. Moore stated they would like to proceed forward . Smith inquired whether the requirement that the guest house not be used for a home occupation was a standard requirement that the City has imposed in the past. Weinberger stated that is a standard condition . Kluth moved, Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application #01-2679, Sharratt and MacDonald Design Company on behalf of 450 and 480 Orono Orchard Road, granting of a conditional use permit for a guest house and a variance for a second oversized accessory structure subject to the property owner filing a restrictive covenant in the chain of title of the property that would limit use of the guest-house to occupants of the principal structure and their nonpaying guests or domestic employees, and that the guest house not be used for a home occupation. VOTE: Ayes 4 , Nays 0. (#9) #01-2677 TERRY AND DOROTHY ERWIN, 2715 CASCO POINT ROAD, VARIANCES, 8:31 p.m. -9:13 p.m. Sid Levin, Builder, and Terry and Dorothy Erwin , Applicants , were present. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted . Weinberger stated the Applicants are proposing to renovate and refurbish the existing house. The renovations include some work to the existing found ation, remo val of the second floor and replace with a new floor plan . All of the proposed renovation would be w ithin the existing foundation. The foundation of the house will not be incrl;!ased. The building envelope would be expanded in two areas , one over the existing den and another over the existing dining room. Weinberger stated in the area where the residence currently is one story, a second story will be added , making the entire house two stories . Weinberger stated the residence does encroach into the average lakeshore lakeshore setback and within the 75' lakeshore setback. Any structural work within 75 feet of the lakeshore and the average setback requires variances. A variance is required to permit alteration to structure within 75 feet of the lakeshore and the average lakeshore setback. A second variance is required to permit structural work to the house within the 10 feet side yard setback . In addition , variances are also needed to permit the structural work to the foundation. PAGE 18 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 21, 2001 (#01-2677 TERRY AND DOROTHY ERWIN, CONTINUED) Weinberger stated the existing hardcover on the property consists of 987 square feet or 20 percent in the 0-75' setback and 6,274 square feet or 55 percent within the 75-250' setback. The hardcover in the 250-500' setback consists of 1,656 square feet or 26 percent. The hardcover within the 0-75' setback includes a stairway, a walk down to the lake, a large patio, and a small portion of the house. The hardcover within the 75-250' setback consists of a driveway, a large parking area, the house, some walkways, and a storage shed. Weinberger noted there would be relatively no change to the building envelope within the 10 foot setback encroachment on the north side of the house. Primarily the areas where changes would occur meet the required 10 feet setback. No variances are required to expand the second level living areas up to the 10 foot setback. Weinberger stated one concern with the proposal is the expanded roof line to the north side of the Applicants' house that may affect sunlight and drainage to the adjacent property. Another factor contributing to potential drainage issues is the total existing hardcover on the property. Weinberger stated the house is non-conforming as it is located within the required setbacks. The property owners have two options to consider with this application. One is to consider remodeling the existing house, which requires the removal and replacement of the second story and some structural work to the foundation; or two, removal the existing residence and build new. The Applicants have chosen to remodel and renovate. One question to address is whether the proposed foundation work is of such a magnitude that this project should meet the standards for new construction. The Applicant has indicated the majority of the foundation work consists of some repair work to the lakeside of the residence, with the remaining foundation being intact and in good condition. Weinberger stated the Planning Commission should consider whether the total amount of hardcover should be reduced if the variances are granted and whether the shed should remain. Weinberger commented the shed would require repair at some time in the near future. Construction of the shed was prior to the adoption of the current zoning standards and is located within the size setback and within 10 feet of another structure. Staff concurs that the topography of the site makes any substantial revisions to the location of the house challenging. The steep slope to the road results in the need for a long driveway and significant site regrading and alteration of drainage patterns in the immediate neighborhood would be necessary to move the house to a location where hardcover standards could be met. Renovation of the existing house, with no expansions where it encroaches required setbacks, would appear to be a reasonable approach. Staff recommends approval of variances to allow renovations and remodeling of the house subject to the following conditions: 1. The Applicant must demonstrate and confirm the foundation work is not required only to allow the expansion of the second story, but would be needed even if no expansion was planned. 2. Hardcover removals within the parking area should be required to provide additional absorption areas on the property. 3. No expansion of the building envelope shall be permitted within required setbacks. PAGE 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 21, 2001 (#01-2677 TERRY AND DOROTHY ERWIN, CONTINUED) Weinberger stated the recommendation of approval is based upon the fact the existing structure is a legal non-conforming structure that was built prior to the current zoning ordinances and that no further expansion of the non-conformities would occur. The proposed expansions are being completed within the required setbacks. Levin stated he has reviewed the entire foundation of the existing residence and found that the area underneath the porch areas on the front of the house needs to be repaired. Levin stated the depth of the foundation is not adequate and need to be at 42 inches. Levin stated the house has a full basement and the remainder of the foundation is in good condition and would be able to accommodate the expansion. Levin stated due to the steep slope to the road, a turnaround area is necessary. The Applicants are proposing that the driveway area would be reduced by 800 square feet, reducing the hardcover in that setback to approximately 47 percent from 55 percent. Levin stated the improvements would add character to the house and more aesthetically pleasing. Levin stated the main level of the residence is scheduled to be fully remodeled, with a new floor plan being proposed. Levin indicated some walls will be removed and some windows will be relocated. ,,,__,,,,v-., would like the Applicants to consider is possible removal of the shed due to the amount of hardcover on the property. Mrs. Erwin stated the shed is used for storage at the present time, with gasoline for their boat and lawnmower being stored in there as well as other items. Erwin stated they would like to make some improvements to the shed to make it match the appearance of the house. Kluth inquired whether the Applicants could address the concrete patio. Kluth stated in his view the builder will need to do some work in the area of the patio to work on the foundation. Kluth inquired whether the patio would be replaced following the foundation work. Levin stated they would be willing to consider a reduction in the size of the patio. Weinberger stated they currently have a two-stall garage. Weinberger stated the City has had a problem with outdoor storage and would prefer having a shed for storage on this lakeshore lot as long as the Applicants are below the structural coverage limit. Weinberger stated the Applicants could consider possibly relocating the shed. Kluth stated he does not have a problem with the shed. Stoddard stated he would like to see the shed brought into conformance with the setbacks. Kluth noted the shed currently is on a concrete pad. Levin stated in his view the shed could be rotated slightly to make it more square with the house as well as having some improvements done to it. Levin commented he would be hesitant to say they would be able to move it enough to meet the ten foot setback since it would encroach into the turnaround area, but they would be willing to relocate it possibly three to five feet off the lot line. PAGE 20 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 21, 2001 (#01-2677 TERRY AND DOROTHY ERWIN, CONTINUED) Stoddard inquired whether the Applicants could come into conformance with the average lakeshore setback. Weinberger stated the largest encroachment into the average lakeshore setback is two to three feet. Levin indicated the encroachment does not impact the neighbors' view of the lake, which is the intent of the setback. Kluth stated the average lakeshore setback tends to vary among the houses in a given area. Kluth stated since there is only a two to three foot encroachment, he does not have a problem with it. Weinberger stated the intent of the average lakeshore setback is to protect views of the lake. Mrs. Erwin stated the neighbors do approve of this project. Smith inquired how much of the foundation is being replaced. Weinberger stated he does not have a percentage of the foundation that is being replaced at this time. Weinberger inquired whether any repair of the foundation is required to add the second story. Levin stated the foundation work is required regardless if a second story is added to the house. Weinberger inquired whether a structural engineer's report could be submitted on the foundation work prior to the City Council meeting. Levin stated he has submitted that already. Weinberger stated he would review that report prior to the Council meeting. Art Kane, 2697 Casco Point Road, indicated he is in support of this project. William Miller, 2691 Casco Point Road, commented all the houses in this area are non-conforming, with 12 out of the 14 requiring variances. Miller stated the Applicants have taken steps to reduce the amount of hardcover on the property. Miller stated he is in support of this project because it would help to improve the neighborhood. There were no further public comments regarding this application. Kluth moved, Berg seconded, to recommend approval of Application #01-2677, Terry and Dorothy Envin, 2715 Casco Point Road, granting of a variance to permit alteration to structure within 75' of the lakeshore and the average lakeshore setback, and a variance to permit structural work to the house within the 10 foot yard setback, subject to the conditions outlined in the May 16, 2001 Planner's Report, subject to the size of the patio being reduced, and with the understanding the shed will be relocated off the property line a reasonable distance prior to the completion of the project, PAGE21 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 21, 2001 (#01-2677 TERRY AND DOROTHY ERWIN, CONTINUED) Stoddard inquired what the hardcover numbers are on the driveway. Levin stated they would be reducing the driveway area by 800 square feet. Stoddard inquired what size the patio is and how much it would be reduced. Kluth stated the patio consists of 520 square feet. Kluth inquired how much the patio could be reduced. Weinberger stated a portion of the patio will be removed in order to do the foundation work, and technically replacement of the patio would require a hardcover variance since it is located within the 0-75' setback . Weinberger inquired how much of the patio would be removed. Levin stated approximately four feet along the length of the patio would need to be removed in order to do the foundation work. Levin stated they would not be removing the rest of the patio . Weinberger stated the rest of the patio could remain, but any replacement would require a variance. Levin stated the 520 square feet might also include the sidewalk and deck area, but he would be willing to reduce the patio by 150 feet. Levin stated the 520 square feet is just the patio area . Kluth stated the Applicants would need a hardcover variance in order to replace the portion of the patio that is removed in connection with the foundation work. Smith commented the Planning Commission likes the amount of hardcover in the 0-75' to be limited as much as possible. Kluth amended the motion, Berg seconded, to include reduction of the patio by 160 square feet. VOTE ON THE ABOVE MOTION: Ayes 4, Nays 0. '\ ,t;L --"""'2676 BA YWIND CHRISTIAN CHffilCH, MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 10.42, Y ftiN~~-CODE AMENDMENT, 9.15 p.m. -9.56 p.m. Helmer Heckel, Pastor, and Don Greenley, Attorney-at-Law , were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting an amendment to the Municipal Code that would list "churches" as a conditional in the B-4 zoning district. Churches are allowed by conditional use only in "R" districts. The request is made on behalf of the Baywind Christian Church, who has an interest in the Applicant's property, which is owned by Franklin J. Svoboda, to use a portion of the existing building for church use. This particular request is for the amendment to the B-4 District. Should the City approve the amendment, a conditional use permit application would be required to consider the Baywind proposal for the use of this site for a church use. PAGE 22 CITY OF ORONO -VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address -Z.1\S ~ i'OINI 'fZoA!:::> Application # 1, '7] Date Received/t 8/ D I Amount Paid '1$:-)£1). ~ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Z.6-111-Z.3-Z.?>-OOOG Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_M_b_~_:-r___,_, _l"\._'6_'1--"-____________ (month/year) I (do~ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Pres;n~roperty: X residential __ other (specify) _________ _ Zoning District: lZE?\ V9'lt\Prl, APPLICANT Phone (home) _______ _ Name ~'l.R,'-( A.t--'O Q::>(2t,'t\-{'-( et.w\N Phone (work) ______ _ Address: '2..11 S c.Pi$w fl:>\tJ\ \21:l1"D City:_o_. ll.J)_· _tJ_o ____ Zip: 5539' 1 O\VNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) -------- Name 5~e. Phone (work) _______ _ Address: ____________ City: ________ Zip: ___ _ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 500,t>OD-t Describe request in detail: ~OVfrrE: ~ f?(;RJ(l...fHstf AN ~S1'1Nb tJotJ--lo~t.M1i-J~ ~~ 0$~~~~0 . (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width X' Hardcover Setback: Front X Side Rear 'f.. Other (specify) -r;' Ot1WM UWE..SHb12t, S6fS~ __ Lot Coverage X Average Lakeshore HARDSIDP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions prevent_ing compliance with Zol!g Code requirements: t2~ ~1~at§.D ~\Jlv\) (attach additional sheets if necessary) 6 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS AU of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete: 1. ✓ 2. ✓ C.otJ\1w& 't>~"\' ~ r,,'IJ:tll,.. 3. ✓ 4. 5. © 7. NA. / V 8. -- Completed Application ·Form Certified Property Owners List of ovvners 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 tru~ .~cj,,e<:frr~ct )!j the (/t of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature _,, { J/.Nl ii, lf-i'/4MI v~ Date Lf l 17 / 0 / 0-\.VNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknovvledges 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 07gation 'nd v~cation_ of this· request. Owner's Signature { J/'jJ ~-lo M,,J W' Date 4 I I 7 / U I . Applicant must have all subm1ttals mto the City offices 25 days before the Plannmg 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 CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 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 re\·iew private data on yourself. 6. Your full name is required to process this application or permit. ~::: ~Q..P~ y Al-0 E1"-f t: KvJ ( (V First Middle Last 27/c;; (A-Sc0 PT Po Address ~J Ay2-A-TY\-/t1N !::J5'3i I City State Zip I under~y right1/1s st"above. _ ( lJ.JvUj VC 0 /v1/1/ vC3 Signature· ( Telephone (612) 249-4600 • Fax (612) 249-4616 q 5 2. L(7( 7 r;, 7 7 Phone 9 SignatureSec.13.04 RIGHTS OF SUBJECTS OF DATA Subdivision 1. Type of data. The rights of indiYidual 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 indhidual. 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 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, cenifying, and compiling the copies. The responsible authority shall comply immediately, if possible, \,Vith 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 indi\idual, 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 \\ithin 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 indi\·idual; 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. 10 t:.'12-Wll.J . SETBACK ZONE: JIAR.u,__:;QVER CALCULATION \VORKS.nEET (CIRCLE ONE) [ 0-75'} 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ® ,.~ {Av) X 40.7 = '241.1 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 i.-1 .. X 'S"2.. = l~~.4 S.F. X = S.F. E. Patio/Deck 41.o X IS-2. = b'Z.~.'2.-S.F. -1.i; X I~ .g (trr-.J) r -/ C>?» • I~ S.F. • F. Landscape z X 2.. = 4,0 S.F. Underlain <,. (., X p;;;. 0 = c:i9,D S.F. By Plastic 7 X Go ~'2,.. S.F. G. Other L~ X 2 = 4. t> S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 1112.C:, S.F. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 41'2.'2-•? S.F. B A \1?,'l -~ ..,_ B 1eiz2--~ X 100 = '2..~.t) % A B X 100 = % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE [}Jo Qf1',J~6] 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 S.F. S.F. F. Landscape 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 = % 12 9(2..~,..J SETBACK ZONE: HARDcOVER CALCUL[TION JVORKSHEET · (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House @) 'f.'2-X4o·1 X (@) z2.i; x 2..A.?, = /'1 *. g S.F. 1 · L,agili 4l~ 0.7 Width . "l,i X?,'3.~ x-@).-i.2 >< ?•-z-= (-10.?,J S.F. '2.-X t\-4. i. X = S.F. t:J. 'J.. )(. z.i-?> X = S.F. i::t.i;.x. g,, B. Garage lb-t'.o X l-6 · '2.. = 3,1> '2... l S.F. C. Drivewa)@ ?>X '24 x @3) 32..''> X3S'. 4 = "3>11~.'D S.F. ~ l">·S'K'2.1.S X@ '2.""t,'S"XIC..,S = S.F. '?1-S.X38,0 6) ?»"S.o .)(.\4 .S D. Sidewalk -Z.1-S X s.o \ ?l'1-~ S.F. '2.<;.o X 4 .'o = \oo.o S.F. E. Patio/Deck 1. ia. X ~ = 4.c; S.F. sr~ C~) :2,. X 2-= ~8-t> S.F. F. Landscape 1~ X = f2,o S.F. Underlain X = S.F. By Plastic X = S.F. G. Other X = S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE ~~I b.G::, S.F. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 11,312•" S.F. B A (p?JI b, (, + B 11;;1s. o X 100 = . if;.;.,;; % A B ., X 100 % + = PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE ["10 c.HA:t-Jl,6' J 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. S.F. D. Sidewalk S.F. 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~-s] S.F. B A + B X 100 = % 1?. ~IN HARlJCOVER CALCULATION \VO ,,..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 13i.o X 12... = I loSfo. o 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 ~"Z.2.¾=.0 S.F. B A \ rps~. o B ~"2-24-o X 100 = ~~-~ % A B X 100 = % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE x [ No U,\:~&G J A. House = S.F. Length Width X = S.F. X = S.F. X = S.F. B. Garage X = S.F. C. Driveway = S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk S.F. S.F. E. Patio/Deck = 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 ' ~~.c1 S.F. B A + B X 100 = \ % I n CITY OF ORONO VARIANCE APPLICATION ADDENDUM TO APPLICATION FOR: Dorothy and Terry Erwin Residence 2715 Casco Point Road, Orono, MN 55391 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST History & Current Situation Application # [Addendum] The applicant has lived in the house on this property since August of 1987. It is a relatively small parcel, long but very thin. The street-side portion of the lot has a large slope from Casco Point Road down to the current house and shed, making driving treacherous in the winters, and all but eliminating the possibility of a garage or shed up on the hilled area. As the slope of the hill begins to taper, the minimal driveway widens to provide tum-around space in front of the garage and shed areas. The current house is situated in a location that is somewhat hanging into both the neighboring line of sight setback as well as the 75 foot setback from the Lake Minnetonka Ordinary High Water Mark. Because of the extreme drop in grade as well as the narrowness of the lot, the hardcover calculations are understandably well over the ordinance guidelines. The portion from 0-75 ft is at 23.0 % (including 297.1 square feet of the house), the portion from 75-250 feet is at 55.5%, and the portion from 250-out is at 26.6%. Proposed Project The applicant has developed a design to renovate and refurbish the existing house in the location in which it sits now. Plans and elevations are attached with this submission, that demonstrate the plan as outlined below: 1. We will utilize the current 2221-square-foot footprint of the house to develop the renovations. No additional hardcover will be created because of the plan. 2. We plan to refurbish the main level and upper level areas that are currently projecting into the line of sight and high-water setback areas by installing new windows, siding, roof shingles and stone veneer. The existing envelope of the house will be maintained in its entirety, with the exception of the upper level shed roof which will be clipped (into a hip-style roof) to reduce further the impact of the hang-over into the setback areas. Portions of the foundation in this area were examined over the winter and were found to vary in depth from 12 to 24 inches below grade. Because of this, we will also underpin these areas to prevent any further ruination of foundation integrity. 3. In the areas of the house outside the sideyard and lakeshore setbacks, we will renovate the main level of the house to include similar ceiling heights as they currently exist. The streetside portion of the main level will include a raised ceiling height in the garage area, as well as the further definition of the "wrap-around" overhang around the garage. Currently, the overhang is above concrete walks on either side of the garage. We will add a cantilevered portion over the front of the garage to tie the two roofs together, creating no additional hardcover because the existing concrete apron and red rock driveway currently qualify the area in front of the garage as hardcover to begin with. 4. The second floor will be removed in its entirety and replaced with a new floor plan that adds character and charm, as well as provides additional ceiling height. Two new second-story protrusions ( one over the existing den and another over the existing dining room) will add width to the house at two differing intervals, making the house appear "squattier" than it is, to minimize the impact of the long, narrow and tall floor plan. The new second floor and attic space above it is designed to sit above the current footprint of the house, and it will not require any variances except for the master bedroom and guest room portions, which sit in the same locations they currently do, hanging into the lakeshore setback areas. As noted in item 2 above, the envelope of space in the non-conforming areas will be maintained (and/or reduced) to minimize the impact in the setback areas. ff : i:w::, HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Unique to the land in question NARROWNESS The current house and property conditions already qualify as non-conforming. The hardcover ordinances are already exceeded in two of the three hardcover zones. This is due to, in large part, to the narrowness (65 foot width) of the lot. With only 11,375 square feet in this zone, the 25% hardcover ordinance allows for only 2843 square feet for house and driveway. If, assuming a new conforming house were to be built at the 75' setback point, an approximately 115 foot driveway would be required to get to the 250-foot setback point. Assuming this driveway would be 12 feet in width (not taking into account a widening at the garage nor a tum-around space), it would result in a minimum of 1380 square feet of hardcover, leaving less than 15 00 square feet for the house and garage structure. THE HILL In order to safely utilize the property, it could be argued that the house and garage should not be moved away from the lake towards the street. In order to maintain enough acceleration space to get cars up the driveway to Casco Point Road, it would be undesirable to move the house backwards on the site (as it is already difficult during extreme weather conditions). Moreover, because of the slope of the hill at the street side of the property, it is unrealistic (as well as undesirable) to place a new garage within this area (as it would require lots of treacherous steps and walks to get down to the house area). The benefit would be to have more hardcover available for a new house in the 75-250 foot hardcover zone, but it would be a long and treacherous walk in the winter from the house if this were the case, putting both the owners and guests at risk. Unique to the existing structure location The existing structure is non-conforming. Sitting 70.6 feet from the OHWM, it encroaches into the lakeshore setback, as well as the line-of-sight setback ordinance. Again, because of the extremely narrow property widths in this area of town, it is undesirable to place a house any farther back from the lake than the ordinances allow for. Moving the house back, especially with the Northern neighboring property only 61.4 feet from the OHWM will put significant limitations on the lakeshore view. People in this area chose to live in these homes to "be on the lake." To move the house backwards would in effect put "blinders" upon the view, accentuating the "bowling alley" feel of the property. The house is non-conforming already, and no additional non-conforming elements are being added by the proposal. The house needs updating, structural repairs and a great amount of work on the inside. In order to update the house the way it should, bringing charm and beauty to the neighborhood, there are two options before us: 1. Use the existing footprint, or A good portion of the foundation is in good shape, and the portions that are not can easily be repaired and underpinned. The non-conforming issues will be maintained as they exist today. No additional non-conforming issues will be created by the renovations, and therefore, seem to be an understandable and acceptable route for the project. 2. Tear down the house in its entirety. Ifwe were to pursue this direction, it is assumed that we would be required to meet all of the ordinances established for the property. Mentioned above, if the garage is attached and the lakeside view is not negatively impacted by setting the house back, we will be left with a 1200-1500 square-foot footprint for the new house, as well as no opportunity for patio or deck space. If the garage is detached and kept up by the road, a treacherous and long path would be necessary to get to the house, putting an element of unnecessary danger into the mix. 3. Further Arguments The intent of the line-of-sight ordinance is to prevent houses being built closer to the lake than their neighbors, thus cutting peripheral views from neighboring houses dramatically. As noted above, the narrowness of these lots already place import on the western side of the houses as really the only lakeside views. The houses neighboring this house, as well as nearly all the others in this area are oriented directly at the lake, knowing already that decent peripheral views are not attainable. The 75-foot lakeshore setback ordinance, established well after the construction of this house, only slightly displaces the current house footprint. However, the nearly 300 square feet of house that is affected by this ordinance plays a dramatic (and necessary) role in the successful utilization of the house. The effect on the landscape and DNR needs for the 75-foot setback seems somewhat arbitrary (isn't 70.6 feet far enough?). Moreover, in terms ofrainwater and re-saturation of the drainfields, allowing the house to be maintained in its current location has no further negative impact on these issues. We are simply leaving the situation as it is. The owners would be perhaps willing to eliminate some areas of patio, walks, and driveways to reduce the amount of hardcover on the property, thus improving the lot, as far as the DNR would be concerned. Unique to the current conditions This property, as noted above, is currently a non-conforming property. The renovations will not create any new hardcover nor encroach any further into lakeshore and line-of-sight setbacks. This is simply a request to allow the current conditions to be maintained in order to refurbish and remodel the existing house. APPLICANTS' LEGAL NAMES Dorothy Leidiger Erwin Terry Alden Erwin wife husband ~- / l ~ 1 ~ f ·-1 l I i 1 1- N~ /1 I { re { t----1----.,•-------------=~~~~ /_ ~ CI I f { .,,_,,_ I I I I I I I (r, I Cr_) I (\ _) : V I I ---I ",. , , 1 N 69.26'51" W ', I --323,11----~////,/~ C-1. '-~ " I o/fJFoilil'.18 ROO< PILLAR-., i w / , I -I~ _ ... ,,, o"' ~~i NI f" z I/ ---1--;.~~-70-5 __ ------. ,,.. ~bd-,;i; -,~ r,<v16.V//1 ..::,, 211.5± _,...-f()U'j;io--1• IRON PIPE {AT PLAT DISTANCE FROM THE NORTHERLY LINE Ce LOT I~ SPR!NG PARK 'Mlli!N 0,05' FtET) / 1 I I • -1 -.,_,_ I I -----1_ I I ( I I I I I ' ' ' ' ...,_, > .."'- /_ ------,(b, : / '(::.."'-------~--! / /7 1 .,,o-,,-) ,:::--: -----1---1635--- !r-=~=,,~-I I I / I .,§'~<P"' -,-.'' / : I --- .J_~--\..,./ '--,____ ~ I ------------------C \' ; I -y[,.""v'----: I ,:: I l -;--211.1--I '-~ I -,--------- '-•XX,' CONCRIClt SW'S ~J I ------------ _,, j • 131TUM!NOUS ORl'IEW-'Y '----A UN£ 275.0 FEET SOUlH\l,£STERLY mn PARAU.El. TO 'lllE SOVlHe:Rt.Y UNE Of LOT tl4 Si'RING PARK --330.49- s 69'28'15" E c~J I' .__;- 1--<:_S I /_ - /7 / L/ I '-' (-.. ... ...... ,) , _)" ""r \ I I I I I 1 ,, I 1 I 1 1 1 I ......, ,I-, v \' !-------<0-. r--. \ --.-d ~ \_'\ ,~ ~ I' g;'; ~ f~ ~ IN "' ~ I ~ I ~ I I I ~ j (J / --------! i ) / --- i fl I I I If I I [ I I D ! fl Ii] }· -~~---"' lJ I § {i I § ~~ I § ~~ C I : l I H -..._ l !- i ~'"-: I § £• I § t 'Z.. ~ . -~ -E, 'Tl£ ~ ' ' {'f{ = # .... .Q t ~ L-._ 1 ~ -. ~ -~ 4 ~ ~£. ~ ~1 <:, i ~ ~t t ----1 -p I ' I /M i-------1 I I ----- :-I l~J-I D ~ I r ~ I ' I I I !-------I "-•1•·- 11:~ □ 111111 □ ill 77 ~-----------~---------------------,------------~~ Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department '---/VO. I ----I <fV Parcel Information Parcel ID 2011723230005 House Number 2715 Street Name CASCO POINT RD Condominium This 1s not a legally recorded map . It represents a compilation of information and data from City, County, and State road authorities and other sources. -~ --- ,, '' ' ' '' ,, 5 (1) '' ,, " '' (2) 4 (3) :,. ' ' (0 '' -..,: ,, C\j .... (4) ~ 0) c:i co D RUN DATE 04/18/01 BATCH 503 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME 38 20-117-23,23 0002 02691 CASCO POINT RD WILLIAM F MILLER ET Al WILLIAM F MILLER 2691 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0005 02715 CASCO POINT RD T & DERWIN TERRY A & DOROTHY L ERWIN 2715 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0009 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 20-117-23 24 0020 02750 CASCO POINT RD DALE A CHRISTENSEN & WIFE DALE A CHRISTENSEN 2750 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 TAXPAYER TOTAL BATCH 503 00012 NAME/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 20-117-23 23 0003 02695 CASCO POINT RD JOHN T REDMOND JOHN T REDMOND 2695 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0006 02745 CASCO POINT RD SR PETERSON & KA PETERSON STEVEN R PETERSON 2745 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 24 0001 02684 CASCO POINT RD D L RUNKLE & L F RUNKLE DAVID L RUNKLE 2684 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 24 0021 02710 CASCO POINT RD CH & BJ PALMER CURTIS H & BARBARA J PALMER 2710 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI43540l 38 20-117-23 23 0004 02697 CASCO POINT RD A & C KANE A LAWRENCE KANE 2697 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0007 02755 CASCO POINT RD D S & J BREITNER DAVIDS & JANA BREITNER 2755 CASCO PT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 PAGE 4 38 20-117-23 24 0019 02750 CASCO POINT RD DALE A CHRISTENSEN & WIFE DALE A CHRISTENSEN 2750 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN. 55391 38 20-117-23 24 0022 02700 CASCO POINT RD DP BUESING & LR RUNNING DANIEL BUESING/LINDA RUNNING 2700 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 II II RUN DATE 04/18/01 BATCH 503 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 5 1•' I CERTIFY HIAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATl:ON OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. /4 · ~ ~ \ . DATE l-f ·ft ..0 I BY ---i..l~____;;;;_:~~=~~ 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#0l-2677, as mailed to the attached list of property owners. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto~~ of MAY, 2001. Denise M. Leskinen ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday May 21, 2001 6:30PM 2750 Kelley Parkway -Council Chambers AGENDA Council Representative: Jay Nygard AUDIENCE MEMBERS: Please sign in for the public record at the front podium if you wish to address the Planning Commission. Applicants will be asked to move to the front table to answer questions when the Chair announces the application. The Planning Commission is an advisory body to the City Council. If action is taken on any items on this agenda, they will be scheduled for the June 11, 2001 City Council meeting unless otherwise ·noted by the Chair. OLD BUSINESS 1. #2636 Gary and Susan Cable, 3532 Ivy Place, Variances (Staff: Paul Weinberger) 2. #01-2668 Manley Bros. Construction, 1973 Fagerness Point Road, Variances (Staff: Paul Weinberger) 3. #01-2671 Alistair and Kristin Jacques, 645 Old Long Lake Road, Variances (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg) 4. #0l-26'{]i7 North Shore Marina, 3222 North Shore Drive, Conditional Use Permit (Staff: Mike Gaffron) NEW BUSINESS 5. #01-2674 Dennis and Diane Killian, 1420 Shoreline Drive, Variance Renewal (Staff: Paul Weinberger) · 6. #01-2675 Donna Lile, 2765 Ethel Avenue, Variance (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg) 7. #01-2678 Kristi Roesler, 1169 Elmwood Avenue, Variances (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg) 8. #01-2679 Sharratt and MacDonald Design Company, on behalf of 450 and 480 Orono Orchard Road, Conditional Use Permit (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg) 9. #01-2677 Terry and Dorothy Erwin, 2715 Casco Point Road, Variances (Staff: Paul Weinberger) 10. #01-2676 Baywind Christian Church Municipal Code Section 10.42, Zoning Code Amendment (Staff: Paul Weinberger) PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS 11. Report of Planning Commission representatives attending Council meetings April 23, 2001 and May 14, 2001. 12. Other issues for discussion. 13. Planning Commission approval of minutes for March 19, 2001 and April 16, 2001. 14. Selection ofrepresentatives for City Council meetings on May 29, 2001 and June 11, 2001. ADJOURNMENT \ . CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kalley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 · Phone (952) 249-4600 Fax (952) 249-4616 ~-· The Planning Commission will hold public hearings in the Council Chambers at 2780 Kelley Parkway on Monday, May 21, 2001, beginning at 6:30 p.m. on the matter of reviewing the following land use applications : 1. #01-2668 Manley Bros. Construction, 1973 Fagarnass Point Road, requests · variances to permit replacement of a deck located above the garage , to permit an expansion of the building envelope for the addition of two dormer windows within 75' of the lakeshore, and an after the fact variance and conditional use permit to permit replacement of two retaining w·alls within 75' of the lakeshore. 2. #01-2671 Alistair and Kristin Jacques , 645 Old Long Lake Road, request variances to permit a new residence to be located 15' from the side (east) property line where 30' is requ ired and to permit residential construction on a lot less than 2 acres in size . 3 . #01-2674 ·Dennis and Diane Killian , 1~20 Shoreline Drive , request renewal of · a variance approying a 20' encroachment into the top of bluff setback requ i rement for construction of a new residence. 4 . #01 -2675 Donna Lile, 2765 Ethel Avenue, requests a variance to permit an expansion to the roof line encroaching 1.6' into the side yard setback adjacent to Casco Avenue where a 15' setback is required . 5. #01 -2677 Terry and Dorothy Erwin, 2715 Casco Point Road, requests variances -to permit complete remodeling of the existi ng house and replacement .of the second floor of the ex i st i ng house encroaching into the average lakeshore setback, 0-75' setback from Lake Minnetonka and 4.1' into the side yard setback. 6 . #01 '.2678 Krisii Roesfer,· 1169 Elmwood Avenue, is · requesting lot area and lot width -variances to cons ider Lot 7 , Block 1 of Skarp and Linquist's Fernh ill, Lake Minnetonka addi tion a record lot to permit future res i dent i al construction , and(or · variances to 'permit a _lot combination of a property not adjacent to the building lot, located at 1169 Elmwood Avenue,· for lake/dock use . · · 7. #01-2679 Sharratt and MacDonald Design Company,.on behalf of 450 and 480 Orono Orchard Road , requests a conditional use permit to permit construction of guest house on a 13.5 a,cre property in the · · ·· RR-1 B .(2 acre-Single_ Family Rural Res idential zon ing district). All persons wishing to be heard are encouraged to attend this meeting . Written comments are accepted and shall be sumi tted to the City of Orono by May 16, · 2001 . Plans are available in the City offices. For an appointment, plea·se call (952) 249: 4600 . . City of Orono By :· Planni ng Commi ssion Paul We inberger Zon ing Adm inistra tor/Planner , (Published in The Laker and Pioneer April· 28 , 2001) ' .. .., .-. -. ·; ., , .. : .. Affk..dvit 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 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. B.) The printed __ L_a_n_d_._u_s_e __ I_t_e_m_s __ _ 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 28th day of __ A_,p,_r_1_· l ____ 20 _Ql, and was thereafter printed and published every Saturday, to and including Saturday, the __ day of _______ 20_; Authorized Agent Suscribed and sworn to me on this 28th day of -.-_A_,p,_r_1_· l _____ , 20 _Ql_. By:_-q_,.,._,....;~d~~; --~ Notary Public KRISTI HOLM NOTARY PUBLIC· l ,'.INN c:SOTA My Cor.1rr,ission Expires ~;:i . 31.: ;rs · l\~ ~~il22,;ieae:a::;1:Zai~:2'aco:2:Z:· .··.:--:;:;--~ Rate Information (1) Lowest classified rate paid by commercial use rs for comparable space : $15 .00 per inch. (2) Maximum rate allowed by law for above matter: $15.00. (3) Rate actually charged for above matter: $7.73 per inch. Each additional successive week : $5 .62. CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Phorie (952) 249-4600 Fax (952) 249-4616 NOTICE . . The Planning Commission will hold public hearings in the Council Chambers· af ''.i180 Kelley Parkway on Monday, May 21, 2001, beginning at6 :30 p.m . on thematterofreviewingthefollowing •. land use applications: 1. #01-2668 2. #01-2671 3. #01-267 4 4. #01-2675 5. #01-2677 6. #01-2678 7. #01-2679 Manley Bros. Construction, J973 Fagerness Point Road, request;variances to permit replacement of a deck located above the garage, to permit an expansion of the building envelope for the addition of two dormer windows within 75' of the lakeshore , and an after the fact variance and conditional use permit to permit replacement of two retaining walls within 75' of the lakeshore. Alistair and Kristin Jacques, 645 Old Long Lake Road, request variances to permit a new residence to be located 15' from the side ( east) property line where 30' is required and to permit residential construction on a lot less than 2 acres in size. · Dennis and Diane Killian, 1420 Shoreline Drive , request renewal of a . variance approving a 20' encroachment into the top of bluff setback requirement for construction of a new residence. Donna Lile, 2765 Ethel Avenue, requests a variance to permit an expansion to the roof line encroaching 1.6' into the side yard setback adjacent to Casco A venue where a 15' setback is required. Terry and Dorothy Erwin, 2715 Casco Point Road, requests variances to permit complete remodeling of the existing house and replacement of the second floor of the existing house encroaching into the average laki;shore setback, 0-75' setback from Lake Minnetonka and 4 .1' into the side yard setback . Kristi Roesler, 1169 Elmwood Avenue, is requesting lot area and lot width variances to consider Lot 7, Block 1 of Skarp and Linquist's Femhill, Lake Minnetonka addition a record lot to permit future residential construction, and/or variances to permit a lot combination of a property not adjacent to the building lot, located at 1169 Elmwood Avenue, for lake/dock use. Sharratt and MacDonald Design Company, on behalf of 450 and 480 Orono Orchard Road, requests a conditional use permit to permi t construction o f guest house on a 13.5 acre property in the RR-lB (2 acre-Single Family R ural Residential zoning district). All persons wishing to be heard are encouraged to· attend this meeting. Written comments are accepted and shall be submitted to the City of Orono by May 16, 2001. Plans are available in the City Offices. For an appointment,_please call (952) 249-4600. · · City of Orono By: Planning Commission 7Jk/~ Paul Weinberger, ZoningA.dni'strJPianner To be published the week of April 28, 2001. Posted at: Orono City Offices Crystal Bay Post Office Long Lake Post Office Navarre Post Office □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ TRACKING SHEET FILE NO. 0 { -di f.p J rJ Staff: ----- Ap~licant: . 5 I T7i: . : : ·. Address: ·{7;;-K,e L/ ¥-.Do ~o "01 y b72 v-Jt ;J i 115. C~sco ·fb,,uT (:j), Meeting with Staff: Date Application Completed: I Incomplete Notice Sent: Date Property Owners Notified: Date Legal Notice Published: PC Meeting(s): s/,,,Jc,1 Notice of PC Action: City Council Meeting(s): "' \01 60Day: Vote: Vote: Vote: Vote: : Vote: ,. Vote: D Resolution X:\APPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\CAROLE\FORMS\TRKNG.SITT '--I (01 -&/· ~pp\/ c -:::>--:0 --