HomeMy WebLinkAboutProject Packetr, acite I J 7-24 -$7
Foo 206
Receipt
pr Initials
CITY or MAW - VARIANCE AP LI TION
Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance)
Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application)
After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROPERT! LOCATION
Site Address
Property Identification Number ( P. I . D. )G"
Please check one - Is the property abstract or torrens?
"I 1 ► OF ' r101,10
1 I r Vr vr�:Jl
Attach legal description to application if not included on requf*4j,. ,.,-F4#'ri*Y-
------------------------------------------------------------==!;m?L=VI 1
APPLICANT Phone ( home) _ f�/- :� �; ��'� - 1.VV
Name V 1I v` . " Phone (work)(�;1
Address: r�.�f/j' l'/�� }. ,�" City: �Zi-p'3$`sc1.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----------------------------------------------------
OMMM (if different than applicant) Phone (home)
Name Phone (work)
Address: City: Zip:
Date Property Acquired JZ/ �y ad- (month/year )
I (do) do not also own the adjacent parcels of land.
-------------...� ---------------------------------------------------------
PR>ZSErT usS O/ PROPENTY
Present Zoning District '- P.I C
Present Use of Property
Residential
Other (specify)
DE8CRIPTION OF MUM" Estimated Construction Cost $
Describe request in detail: JAIX10 (wes Ix/o,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VARIANCM MWIRM ,
Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover
Setback Variances ( front
Side
Rear) -
Other
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Y I
HARDSHIP
Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict
enforcement of zoning regulaytions:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DNSCPTPTION Or UNOSUAL FN( RMN CONDITIONS
ooscribe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning
-ode Re, : i rert its:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
RXQUIRED SUBMITTALS
�1: l Completed Application Form
Certified Property Owners List of own, s within 150' (you can obtain
�— this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center
346-3271).
. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (010) pre -addressed to each of the
names on the above list with no return address.
4. ) Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required.
Plat Map.
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certification by 7-ning Department that Variance Application is complete.
Zoning Official's Signature Date
APPLICAM' S 8IGNA2%=
The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or
requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or
unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that
the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her
knowledge.
Applicant's Signature %�+•-� _ Date
ONNERS SIMATURE
The owner hereby ackow ledges and agrees to this application and further
authorizes reasonable entry onto the property bj City staff, consultants,
agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga-
tion and verification of this req eat.
Owner's Signature C�-G�i- Date cf 7 Y-6'T
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the
Planning Comaission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the
th? rd Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled
review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council, and, if an
applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, to please make arrange-
ments to have an authorized agent attend in your place and tc, advise the
Building i Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting.
32
PLAN DATE 08/17/67
HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY IWORMATION SYS'
REPORT NO.
PI435401
PROPERTY 0WNERS LIST
PAGE
5
CATCH 003
38 20-117-..3 32 0004
38 20-117-23 32 OOOS
38 20-117-23 32 0006
r-POP ADDR
02818 CASCO POINT RD
02818 CASCO POINT RD
02824 CASCO POINT RD
C:':ER NAME
ROURT M EMFIELO A WIFE
ROBERT M EMFIELD A WIFE
MIRIAM I JOHNSON
TA -PAYER
DALE R RAASCH
DALE P RAASCH
MIRIAM I JOHNSON
r!,:ME/ADOR
2618 CASCO POINT RD
2818 CASCO POINT RD
2624 CASCO POINT RD
WAYZATA MI 55191
WAYZATA MH SS391
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 20-117-23 32 0608
38 20-117-23 32 0009
38 20-117-23 32 0010
FPOP ADOR
02825 CASCO POINT RD
02621 CASCO POINT RD
02617 CASCO POINT RD
C:_:-r NAME
DAVID J YORKS A WIFE
R E DEMSHAR A M M DEMSHAR
M B STROM ETAL
�
TA -PAYER
DAVID J YORKS
RONALD A MARGARET DEMSHAR
W S BRICKLEY A C M BRICKLEY
:,E/ADOR
2825 CASCO POINT ROAD
2821 CASCO POINT RD
2817 CASCO PT RD
WAYZATA MN 55391
ORONO MN SS391
WAYZATA MN SS391
t
38 20-117-23 32 0011
38 20-117-23 32 0012
38 20-117-23 32 OO13
FRJP ADOR
02815 CASCO POINT RD
02813 CASCO POINT RD
02611 CASCJ POINT RD
G.: 7R NtrrE
6 A C SCANLON
L A M BACHKES
GWENDOLYN C ROSS
'•►.
It -:PAYER
GENE A CATHERINE SCANLON
LEONARD A MARY A►N BACHKES
GWEN L ROSS
KA!'E/ADOR
2815 CASCO POINT ROAD
2613 CAS A POINT RD
2811 CASCO POINT RD
OROtq MN 55391
WAYZATA MN 55391
WAYZATA M! 55391
36 20-117-23 32 0014
36 20-117-23 32 0016
PROP ADOR
02607 CASCO POINT RD
02800 CASCO POINT RD
O::r::R NAME
E E MUTTERER A R M MUTTERER
P FOX - F HERFUlsRTH REAL EST
Tt J AYER
ERNEST r- t%JTTERER
THOMAS B KI14G
TOTAL BATCH 003 00011
r..%: tE/ADOR
2807 CASCO PT RD
2800 CASCO POINT ROAD
OPOt70 MI 5r'91
WAYZATA MI 55391
I CERTIFY THAT RNE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRITE
REPRESENTATION 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.
DATE f- Y
i
p-
a
CITY OF ORONO
NOTICE
The Planning Commission will hold public hearings in the Council Chambers
at 1275 South Brown Road on Monda:, October 19, lr37, on the ma*ter of
reviewing the following land use applications:
1. #1204 Orono Community Church, 770 Old Crystal Bay Road see
approval of ar. amended site plan for the church use.
2. 81205 Robert Maxfield , 4175 North Shore Drive seeks lot area and
width renewal variance to construct new residence.
3. 11206 Katherine C. Perry, 2693 Kelly Avenue seeks hardcover and
side setback variances to construct screened porch and three level
deck.
4. #1207 Gene i Catherine Scanlon, 2815 Casco Point Road seek
hardcover and lakeshore setback variances to allow the rebuilding of a
deck.
5. 11208 Michael Sayl, 1990 Spates Avenue seeks side setback
variances to allow consti -ction of an en^losed entry to the existing
residence.
6. 11209 Tina White, 2150 Prospe Avenue seeks a side setback
variance to construct a three seasoned porch.
7. #1210 Charles Jones, 3129 Casco Circle seeks a conditional use
permit to allow the rebuilding of a non -rental, second residence on
the property.
8. #1211 Gerald Neslund, 1225 Orono Oaks Drive seeks a conditional
use permit and variance to construct a driveway through a protected
wetland to service a future residence.
9. 01213 Rollin Lacy, 2655 rth Shore Drive seeks hardcover and
side setback variances to allow construction of an attached garage.
10. #1215 Smith Bay Marina, 1955 Shoreline Drive seeks a conditional
use permit to allow installation of a sea wall.
11. #1216 Clark Winslow, 1595 Bohn's Point Road seeks a conditional
use permit to allow the dreAging of a pond designated as a protected
wetland.
All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. The meeting
starts at 7:00 P.M. Written comments are solicited. Plans are available
for review in the City offices, by appointment.
By: Planning Commission
Jean A. Mabustn,
Buil ng i Zoning Administrator
To be published the week of October 5, 1987.
CITY OF OPIONO
Tho pilg- tp Conenwlen wrr (told Public
fte/rra in the CAwcd Menem M 1276 lntrMr
1%egetFlood onlaonder.Oolaber 19. On
the RWW of revw&" Ilia losoertrtp WA Uri
* 1 1204Glens Corwrrry Chia". 7?0 (ld,
Ovew am Olow seem amovso of en amid
ed alto Ptwt for the Owch Liss
2 120611oeort MadiMd. 4175 Mori.. Shore
a" ONM lot ens w4 trash reftewaf ve WWO
to ooruruct new reeftrim
3. 1206 KatlterY* C Pony. 203 KONY
Aeerrre soeee ftwdcover and side sMaerar veil•
Omm to conetrt cl saee*d porn end tfree
Mvel dace
a 1207 Gene a Certerit* Sc~. 2615
f�eoo Fbe+f Flood seen ftweoae► sM laltaerron
oeteeen www" oe a arear the r.arlrq of e
dock
5 1206 kfth@o SHOW. 1 NO Spam Aw%a
on" aide aatieott vertertOM to slow conetruc-
am of an euelNed ewy to We a.wrrp
go' r
0 1209 Tote white. 2150 A*0Oect !hears
sew a om e.te.ca vvtmos to cenotrucl a
free mesorted prat.
7 1210 Chwleo dorm... 3129 Ceeoo Otcle
sew a conmwnel Lies permll to allow the
ttshtrrerrp of a nen.erttM. escond ►eMde I on
f* prcpety
S 1211 Geraid Nwketd. 1225 over* O&M
orM o wie a oonOlMond use POI d end vwi-
oftee to u rstna t a dArrewey thrwrn o Pnted•
ad wettsne to senaoe a kAun nmid
d 1213 corn Litcir. ldbb taarllt Shore Orbs
sew eereoa« grad alb aotercn vertortooa to
ettw oartabuctlarrof w Mtar►tedri~
10 1215 &MM ley ME & . 1965 ShMS O i
oAw sea. a come Ertel Lies Perrfrt to •row in-
essaemn of a see was
It 1210 clerk YYl OO - 16N MOM4 PON"
Floss Nae s oete oriel um perert to slow Wits
drodo ftfl of a Sand dNtirteled se a Proteryoe
wefwtd
M psi ttete wlMtetd to to hoard wad spew all
no torte The weelYp @W% M 7 00 P.nt Will -
an coeMterte we eeliQM Pwo we arnreoN
ter firmer in f* Orty aMsee. M 000 0 8
of PUM" CoR-Nmn ,few. A itebusth,
0600p see zowtl AdmYoetralor
NPtr0 ~ In The faker and Pteneor on Oct 6.
11111197)
Affidavit of Publication
State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin
Bill Holm, being duly sworn, on oath says that he is
,n authorizE agent and employe- of the publisher
the newspaper known as THE LAKER. Mound. Min-
nesota• and has full knowledge of the facts which are
stated below
.4 ) The newspaper has complied with all the require-
n, its constituting qualifications as a qualified
newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute
331 A.02, 331 A 07. and other applicable laws. as
amended.
B ) The printed
which is attach -d was cut from the Limns of Bald
newspaper, and was printed and published once each
week for successive weeks
It was first published Monday.
the Jl day of CY t 9 �J.
and was thereafter printed and published every
Monday, to and including Monday.
the day of . 19
c�
Authorized Agent
Subscribed and sworn to /me on this
.S day of t,y C.7 19 %.
By
Public
K L d_ xrt . H
Fi�T�• Fuetlaulir*rt'•c'a !,
ckavER CouNTY
()orreryoar forms An 3 1
� J Mil OA
(1) Lowest classified rate paid c, . ommeruai users or cur oars
ble space S7 84 per inch
(2) Maxrmufn rate allowed by law for above mailer S4 54 per .rich
0) Rate actually charged for above matter f4 S4 per n(')
Each additional successive weep $3 il3 per n,,
CRRTIFICATB OF KRILING
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss.
CITY OF ORONO )
I, Jamie Bosma, of the City of Orono, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public Hearing
concerning the matter of #1207, was mailed to the attached list
of property owners .
In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal
this 2nd day of October, 1987.
(D-(�
J4ffie Bosma
CE"IFICATE OF MAILING
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY OF ORONO )
I, Jamie Bosma, of the City of Oronn, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public Hearing
concerning the matter of #1207, was mailed to the attached list
of property owners .
In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal
this 30th day of May, 1988.
Jam 4e;B ma
TO: Planning Commission and Council
FROM: Alan P. Olson, Village Planner
GATE; September S. 1978
#419
SUBJECT: 0419 Variance
Michael Farrell, 2615 Casco Point Road
Mr. Farrell is proposing to add a wood deck on top of the lower
terrace of three existing on his shoreline embankment. '!fie upper
two levels will be planted. The existing stairway will be used.
The lower concrete wall is to be faced with wood. Proposed
deck area is 165 sq. ft.
The terraces were installed following a major washout of the
hillside after the heavy rain this July. The Council approved
an emergency conditional use permit for this work on July 11, 1976.
Variance required: 34.201 setback and 34.202 hardcover
Lakeshore setback required: 75 ft.
proposed: 15 ft.
variance: 60 ft. - 80%
Hardships: existing terrace location and steepness of
the ambankmon t .
PLJ NK= CONMNISSION KZM NG - SEPTEMBER 11, 1978
Discussed events behind construction of retaining walls and intention
of placing deck on lower level. Jim Olson, city engineer, stated that
if a spaced wood dock were constructed over a gravel subbase, that
runoff water filtration would be adequate if not better than tba
existing runoff. Item tabled to allow site inspection by mm■6era
and to allow staff to notify neighbors. To be acted on by Fleming
Commission on 9-25-78 and be on the Council agenda on 9-26-78.
PLAMFIHG COWISSIOM MEETING - SEP DCBZR 25, 1978
The Flaming Commission recommends the variance applicatiom,dne to
hardship of terrain, be approved for the eonatruction of a desk
15' X 11'. The applicant's plan was accepted but with the following
additions: a gavel bass of at least 1211, span spaced wood chat
and an undetermined number of plantings be added to the desk level
for visual screening, to contain the soil and provide nutrismt
filtration.
A minority opinion was voiced concerning the setting of a pwrese"t
within the 75' lakeshore setback.
--1
MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING '.iELD ON S6PTDl 119 1978
• raga /
Planning Commission also requested review of
the Conditional Ilse Permit on the Church due to
the change of ownership.
Mr. Farrell was present. Frahm stepped down due
to a possible conflict of interest. It was
noted that due to staff error the neighbors had
not been notified. Discussion was regarding
the events behind the construction of the
retaining walls and the intention of placing
a dock on the lower level. Jim Olson, city
engineer, stated that if a spaced wood deck was
c-,astruated over a gravel subbase. the runoff
water filtration would be adequate if not better
than the existing runoff. Hurr moved to table
this item to allow site inspection by members
and to allow staff to notify neighbors. In order
to avoid any delay to the applicant this item
will be on the Planning Commission agenda for
action on September 25, 1978 and on the Council
agenda September 26, 1978. Motion seconded by
eaemah. Vote: Ayes (5). Nays (0). Motion
passed unanimously.
Mr. Anderson was present. The Planning Commission
briefly reviewed the request. It was noted ►hat
due to staff error the neighbors had not bees
notified. Hassel moved to table this item to
allow staff to notify neighbors and to provide
the applicant time to furnish a revised plan
for the proposed deck as the plan he had differed
from the plan originally submitted with 'he
application. McDonald seconded the not Am.
Vote: Ares (6). Nays (0). Notion passed
unanimously. This item will be on the Planning
Commission agenda of September 25. 1978 and on
-he Council agenda on September 26, 1976.
MMM X
565 last SIX881
FINAL @=IN Ulm
(1367) cmttmwd i
4am T , .AWAM
2815 Coe" Pbi t ld:
VARIAMCi
(/i19)
Z�S �
116O / yam,
. ru=�MCt
t4=)
•
MINUTES OF A P ANMING OMMISSION MWING ULD OM 5WnN - 25, 1976
Paso 3
2. Installatior of required curbing st.3 landscaping A.J.
as recomimanded by the County highway dopart� t and 19" aw"I"V1lr are
the City engineer, not to include veiny additional =us
right of nay. (See revised sap shoving suggested (0414) CMOs
landscaping areas.) Landscaping timetable required.
3. Combination of remaining Tourangeau residential
lots for tax purposes (Lots 7.14 b 20).
4. Closing of one rear station window for building
code requirsments.
3. Approval of variances necessary to accomplish
the above.
Notion seconded by Hannah. Vote: Ayes (6), !lays (0).
Motion passed unanimously.
Mr. and Mrs. Farrell were present. Tom Frahm steppod�lllCM& Imm
darn due to a possible conflict of interest. Discus- MS 0200 !►!mot �.
sioo included the actual diaansioens, elevations and VAtIMW
type of wood proposed co be used for the dock. 1lsyor (*419)
Van Most stated that the recoendation of the smgiassr
did not take into consideration *-%y filtration of
phosphorus. Wilson and Hannah t.uchn expressed concern
about setting a bad precedent. Mr. Farrell stated that
the plan for the deck had been submitted to both the
DKR and the M=9 but they did not have any interest
in the deck.
Hassiserel moved to approve the variance request dw to
hardship of terrain to build a deck 15' x 111, subject
to the following conditions:
1. a gravel base of at least 12" .
2. The deck be an open spaced wood dock with an
undetermined number of plantings on the dock
level for visual screening and to contain the
soil and provide nutrient filtration.
.lotion seconded by McDonald. Vote: Ayes (4)9 Mns (1)
Abstained (1).
C. Stevan Wilson opposed on the basis that so p"ieal
hardship was demonstrated sand felt it we"d set a bN
precedent.
-kttGULAR MEETING OF THE 01d)NO COUNCIL, SEPTOMIR 26, 1979 reve d
6. Garage on Lot 7, Block 1 and all other Luild-
ings to meet all setback requirements or they
must be moved or removed.
7. Park dedication fee due on all platted 1•2ts.
Council Meeting - September 26, 1978
Mrs. Hollander and Mr. Hauer were present.
Mayor Van Nest moved, Pesek seconded, to approve
the preliminary subdivision request of Mrs. Roy
Hollander, 2SS Sixth Avenue North, per the Planning
Commission recommendations of September 11, 1978,
conditioned on the proposed private road being
platted all the way through the division at this
time, being blacktopped according to the City
Fngineer•s approval, either with a cul de sac or
built all the way through without a cul de sac?
an additional 10 ft. of right of way along County
Road Six being dedicated but not to affect any lot
configuration as shown on the preliminary plats
park dedication fee being paid for the lots in
Phase I, with the remaining lots of Phase II being
paid at a later date; access to Lot 8 shall be by
easement across eith r Lot 7 or Lot 9, to private
road, not directly to County Road Six. Motion,
Ayee (3) - Nays (0)
sutler moved, Mayor Van Most secon&.d, to adopt
Resolution 1942, A Resolution Approving A condit-
ional Use Permit For Lowell Zitsloff. Motion,
Ayes (3) - Mays (0).
syseivlslar
255 Sixth Avmnw NbsW
(Continued) r
RESOLVTZN 1962 .
Lovell 51tsloft
Mr. Alan Olson, City Planner, entered into this �AtIAMCs
record the following request of Michael Farrell, 281S Crime Point ame
281S Casco Point Road, dated September S, 1978, 1419
which states: Michael fassrll
Mr. Farrell is proposing to add a wood dock on
top of the lows terrace of three existing on
his shoreline embankment. The upper two levels
will be planted. The existing stairway will be
used. The lower concrete wall is to be faced
with wood. Proposed deck area is 165 sq. ft.
The terraces were installed following a major
washout of the hillside after the heavy rain
this July. The Council approved an emergency
conditioner use permit for this work on July 11,
1978.
lCdntlsslN�
REGULAR MMIMG Or THE ORM COUNCIL, SEPTMUM 26, 1970
� a
Variance required& 34 '91 setback and 34.202
hardcover
.�
201S CaeeO Poll* 3f00�
Lakeshore setback required: 7S ft.
proposed& 15 ft.
variance: 60 ft. 001
Hardships existing terrace location and steep-
ness of the embankment.`
Planning Commission Meeting - September 11, 1970
•~ .w
Discussed events behind construction of retaining
2,' -
walls and intention of placing deck on lower level.
�•,' r ..'r
Jim Olson, City Engineer, stated that if a spaced
*, •+
rood dock were constructed over a gravel subbase,
that runoff water filtration would be adequate
if
�;�.:. i{ •�� �~
not better than the existing runoff. Itee
•
tabled to allow site ihopection by members and
, ,,� �:, .
to allow staff to notify neighbors. To be acted
•
.
on by Planning Commission on September 25, 1970
and be on the Council agenda on September 26, 1976.
ram' • .�
Planning Commission Meeting - September 2S, 1970
�.
The Planning Commission recommends the variance
application, due to hardship of terrain, be
approved for the construction of a deck 15' Y 111.
'!!1e applicant's plan was accepted but with the
c:
following additions: a gravel base of at least 126,
open spaced wood deck and an undetermined number
. ,.�
Of plantings be added to the deck level tar visual
screening, to contain the soil and provide nutrient
V +►•
ftltration
•x4
A minority opinion was voiced concerning the
setting of a prece-lent within the 7S' lakeshore
.•
setback.
Council Meeting - septed 970
•!
Pesek moved, sutler secon<.,a.,, to approve
variance request of Michael Farrell, 201S Casco
Point Road, per the Planning Commission recom.
mendations of September 2S, 1970. Motion, Ayes (3)
Nays (0) .
Mt. Alan Olson, City Planner, entered into the VARMIM •
record the following request for a variance of 1940 shadw"& rM
"wodore Anderson, 1940 Shadywood Road, dated 1430
September 1, 1979, which states: Tboodere Andecear
(, rry of ORONO
A 0`. s.000w tl ter. M...M. Wr•11~ oi■ Tdmft .MN
Mr. Mo6ael Farrell
2815 Casoo Point load
�u....oa 53391 .
now= Cr CIM 000WIL ACTIM
onto of wetings lk-x,tq_ _T 26, 1978
w
Vetoes = r r _�gainet AboU
Actions App waI s
Approvals
Deferrals
,._ Referrals
.,_ Daniels
apt "'��' • •'•" �:
PAWS f
Mat. of rs"
,10 1 r -
hs subait` ' ...isb joct to ., lcablo ordieroe
Bub joc-t to conditians noted
Pendinq reetipt of information noted �.
Reviver by others, an noted
for reasons noted
•0YM i SPWZ L CQIDITIOoi s Approved variance for conatrlsatiam of wr
space wood dock pr� a odnimn 12" travel subba w be wds! do goat
and that plantin=s be added to the deck level for visral sereMSM aid
nutrient filtration.
V4MMIu@e*,R oariawe approval eatpises tone yeas attar ttio tleg d1q. Y. .
Contact building inspector fan repined pmubs.MT
_ Conditional We Apps I _)hat be ragweed ammosur. • ;"' `_
awires M _
Met tie up" � � ,i .
aMlarotilp er �• '* �q���
_ Prellaieasy Subdivision appwov I gists alter age game of •
Meeting date.
Cmtoot Zoom Admdaistratien fer Plod plat qs.
_ Final Sutidiviaioo apr naval aspirse 6 w ndo alter wingelne does.
Contsat Zoning Administration Slaw tUb g end
_ Deferred Items my be deslased Somewft if amalgam
tails to Provide iafarnrtien uld" we swab at a setlmg
datat or by data epoeified by Owned.
It You desire eartifled copies of the efflaUl City Owned MU rates, the
are available Ey the Deputy City elm& eon swiwr and aeenawl 1W do
council.
VOW
40
wo% qm a
eat
7�
Certificate of Survey
for Gene & Cathy Scanlon
in Lot 120, SPRING PARK
Hennepin County, Minnesota
/Z0 Co vf'e
C."aft J/.` \
'r1 ci,'r1
i` 1 • i�rfe/C y.
`� V.e.1ad
to Loh Jhorc
�w1' /1•awra
.N„ fle.•ir.� �
• Oro otlLr..
4.x
I(O
,e
NARo CoueR
RPrKoveO
�
aA'
fioOoJ1Je.4.
rorovj 1 Y:i
NAAi�.It.oI':qre
A. .t
%fe, t
i•wa
O%
%
Qg.paa•
Scala 1r = 30'
Date 8-31-81, s-�I•II ...r•,.•-r��rA
0 Ir'un marker
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct
dtion of a sur.ey of the boundaries of the descr
All that part of Lot 120, SPRING PAI<K arrd a
platted land and that portion of Latest+ore
/ lying between Lot 120 of SPRING PART and th,
said lot projected to Lake I•iinnetrvrl a, acco
plat thereof on file or of record i r IH,mnnep
Minnesota, which lies Northwesterry of a li
parallel with and distant 5 fret Northwsste
Southwesterly line of said Lot and ihr exte
�'•ati o f .
and the location of any existing ouildin,is. It d
pert to show any other improvements or eticroacto
COFFIN 6 GRONBEkG, INC.
a k 5 . i5 r�-n rid—Lic. u."-1
Engineers, Land Surveyor „ id P11
Long Lake, Minnesota I
400
DRAIN
TILE -
Z; 1 labor)
ArCR£:ATE -
-CLAY COMPACTED
VIRGIN SOIL
L ME ,
ICkE TE r/E BA CK
.:w
_ C
7 3 �r n a�•ae,� J
. oZ cS �-- ,_ 4 _' /�" .yam, D — 7 S
l (� Al e4lt- + ::_ o ,a.(
af e,-�
s�
Lo
alit /lfax-L-
ORDINANCE NUMBER 39 , SECOND SERIES
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE ALLOWING EMERGENCY
RESTORATION FROM STORM DAMAGE COM0IENCING
JULY 27, 1987 THROUGH AUGUST 31, 1987
The City Council of Orono Ordains as follows:
The municipal code of the City of Orono is amended by adding
Ordinance Number 39 , Second Series:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF POLICY. The City Council shall waive
certain standards of Section 19.93 Subdivision 19 and Section 10.22
Subdivision 2 in order to allow emergency restoration of lakeshore and non-
lakeshore yards damaged by the severe storms that entered the City on July
23, 1987 and July 26, 1987. Staff is hereby directed to issue general
permits for land alterations based on the following guidelines:
a. Filling and grading in excess of 100 cubic yards to permit
restoration to original grades when feasible.
b. Filling and grading within 75 feet of the shoreline or all
lakes to permit restoration to original grades, such restoration
may require installation of retaining walls, the City Engineer
shall review all permits seeking use of retaining walls.
SECTION '. This ordinance shall not be interpreted to include the
restoration of stLuctures damaged by these storms and located within 0 to
75 feet of the shoreline of all lakes, except for docks that shall be
rebuilt per current standards of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District.
SECTION 3. The City shall waive the payment of fees for all
general permits that inv ol•le land alterations under this ordinance.
SECTION 4. A public hearing has been scheduled before the
Planning Commission on September 8, 1987 to review a proposed permanent
ordinance that would establish guidelines and procedures for the City to
follow in cases of natural disasters.
SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be effective beginning July 27,
1987 and shall terminate on August 31, 1987.
SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall be published in the Laker and
Pioneer newspapers and shall be effective immediately upon publication.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on the 27 th day
of July, 1987 by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
;Publish
T: Jam R. Gra , ayor
-------------------
i the Laker & Pioneer newspaper the week of August 17, 1987
PERMIT
CITY OF ORONO PERMIT TYPE: 40010 NG
U4142
1335 Brown Rd South • P U Box 66 Permit Number 0 /26/67
Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Date Issued
(6121 473- 7 357
SITE ADDRESS: 2815 CASCO POINT RD
DESCRIPTION:
E;ui Idin3 Permit Tyr`-t• .-F-LAND ALT
Building Work Type STORM DMG REPAIR
FEE SUMMARY:
CONTRACTOR:
i Ji �i tQQi iQt)
,1WN&R. -- Applicant --
t I_IJ GENE
E:I R (A�-C.I_I PCI I NT Rr,
AY4'ATA MN SS_)y 1
612 ) 471
R MA
ALL H }tT SHOULD NOT EXCEED 5' FOR EACH 'SEGMENT GRAIN TILE SHOULD BE
BE PLACED AE,CII►T 12" AECIVE THE GROUND FCIR EACH E:ENT, F'Ek CITY ENGINEFR
r - THE UNDERS I GNED HEREBY REQUESTS PERM I SS- I ON TO MAKE THE REAL I MF'RI)VEMEN TS
SPECIFIED AND AGREES TO [)CI ALL WORK IN SlR1C:T COMPLIANCE WITH ALL CITY OF
ORONO ORDINANCES AND :TAT- OF M I NNE' I) T A GU ILO I NG COIK RE:;; U I RE14i_N T �
AP 'L CC
PERMI E IGNATURE ISSUED4 SIGNATURE
UP
CITY of ORONO
Post Office Box 660Ury gal Hay, Mi,ineaota !Vj:IZiaMunwipal Offices
On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka
October 5, 1987
Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik 6 Associates
Attn: Glenn Cook
2335 west Trunk Highway
St. Paul, MN 55113
Re: Zoning Files f1207 Scanlon, #1214 R. Ziminski, #1215
Smith Bay Marin 6 Clark Winslow
Dear Glenn:
The following land use applications are enclosed for your
review and comment. Please advise in your comments if additional
information will be necessary from any of the applicants.
Your written comments should be submitted to this uffice no
later than Monday, October 12, 1987.
Sincerely,
Jeanne A. Mabusth,
Building 6 Zoning Administrator
JAM/tln
Enclosures
BUILDING A ZONING - 473.7357 • ADMINISTRATION S FINANCF 473 7358 • PUBLIC WORKS 4737339
ASSESSING
1
Ckto G b»wroo. ►E
Bones t roo
'°°"' ►`
rosrpn C AMNr ►F
C
E>aC�o.•O A Lf�.bMf ►f
/�
- Rose. ■e
kKfyrd E fy.w ►E
Anderlik &
OtIon
CO ` /E
CyV- rnn f coo ►[
Associates
Tnor.ta, f Moyes ►E
E
% C. � ;�
Englnee►s i Architects
October 12, 1987
Citv of Orono
Box 66
Crystal Bav, MN 55121
kttn: Jeanne Mahusth
Re: F;le #139-1207
C. Scanlon
2R15 Casco Pt. Rd.
Dear Jeanne:
OfN A Go.pon /E
f<RMo W fowe Of
Cana6a C Nt.rONdt ►f
prr, A Sot/Oon Of
q{ara A M44on ►E
[rO ■ fww Of
EAKhar• t Flatr -w— /f
saw,I f It*tW* ►f
Oat�.a o LOU=& Of
Ttvmn W f►tr.wn of
#Awhw, ( tynn Of
j*ww% a uarane Of
arlw-rM / "drrtor If
.-eq • A a& Mwaon • f
Mar• a Dohs ►f
a(rtrr•T C aytWlt A I A
thorns/ f Angrf Of
"o A,o A tanlpra ►t
Cha ,e% A f,gvson
Ira M ►awr'tay
Marton M (bwr
.,Ilan 4 [tW"-
rAan A %rV
We have reviewed the application for the property located at 28IR Coscn Point
Road. The applicant is requestin¢ permission to re -construct a deck and
storaee huildine in the 0-75' area of the lot.
There is not adequate information available to make a detaileA review. We
should have information on the deck and building design along with elevatinnq
and distances from the lake shore.
If you have anv qupstionn, please contact this office.
Y-urs very truly,
RnNFcrRnn, Rnct:NF, ANDPRT.TK 6 4RSnCIATF.S, TNC.
Glenn R. Cook
GRC / jo
Enc 1 oa+t re
7192e
2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota SS113 • 612-636-4600
TO: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley
Orono Planning Commission Members
City Administrator Bernhardson
From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator
Date: October 15, 1987
Subject: #1207 Gene 6 Catherine Scanlon, 2815 Casco Point Road -
Variance - Public Hearing
Pertinent Ordinances -
1. Ordinance 39, Second Series -• Interium ordinance allowing emergency
restoration from storm damage of 7/27/87 through 8/31/87 - Exhibit F.
2. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and 2 - No new construction allowed within
the 0-75 feet lakeshore setback aiF_a.
3. Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 A through J - Non -conforming uses -
Please note this section only applies to structures containing non-
conforming uses and can not be considered when dealing with conforming
structures (residential accessory structures) to be reconstructed in
substandard setback areas.
Pertinent Facts -
Zoning District - LR-lC
Total A•:aa = 14,228 s.f. or .32 acres
Hardcover
0-75' area 4,200 s.f.
Existing 116 s.f. (6"x232' of retaining wall ties)
Allowed 0 s.f.
75-250' Area 9,600 s.f.
Existing = 4,200 s.f. or 43.7%
Pertinent Issues -
1. Applicant was allowed to replace existing walls destroyed with storm of
7/23/87. Under the interium ordinance, staff had no authority to issue
building permits for the deck and shed destroyed in that same storm.
2. The shed and deck are considered new construction and subject to
Ordinance 10.22, Subdivision 1 and 2:
0-75'
Allowed 0 s.f.
Existing 116 s.f. approximate calculation by staff of hardcover
for walls
Proposed 305 s.f.
Variance = 189* s.f.
*Shed 49 s.f. (original shed 7'x7')
Deck = 140 s.f. (original deck 21'xl0')
Zoning File #1207
Octoi�er 15, 1987
Page 2 of 3
List of exhibits
Exhibit A -
Exhibit B -
Exhibit C -
Erhibit D -
Exhibit E -
Exhibit F -
Exhibit G -
Exhibit H -
Exhibit I -
Application
Property Owners List
Plat Map
Building Permit for
Profile of Wall
Ordinance F, Second
Cook's Letter Dated
Site Plan
Survey
Restoration of Retaining Wall
Series
10/12/87
Review of Application -
On August 26, 1987, staff issued a permit for the rebuilding of
retaining walls within applicant's lakeshore yard per authority given to
staff in Ordinance 39. The ordinance did not allow restoration of
structures other than retaining walls within the lakeshore protected area.
The request to build decks and shed shall be considered new construction
within r.he lakeshore yard.
Tt'.e applicant notes the following hardships:
1. Steep topography/slopes;
2. Need to provide storage for boating equipment, etc. rather than
carry up the steep bank each time.
Staff notes the following upon site inspection of the property:
1. Applicant already has excessive amounts of hardcover within 75-
250' zone setback area.
2. Applicant has been provided f lat, terraced area within the 0-75'
setback area dith the construction of retaining walls.
3. Applicant has not requested a stair/access to the lake, such
structure must be limited to 4' width stair with safety steps limited
to 4'x4'.
4. A lock box structure may be considered by the Planning Commission
for security reasons. If hardship is acceptable maintain standards of
the code for lakeshore lots divided by roadway - 48 inches maximum
height and limited to 20 s.f.
Staff cannot find adequate hardships to support request for deck and
must recommend denial of 14'x10' deck. There is adequate flat terraced
areas already available to applicant. If Planning Commission finds the
security need valid and hardship has been demonstrated, your motion should
limit the storage structure to a lock box, maintained at 48' in height and
not to exceed 20 s.f. in area. Planning Commission may consider asking for
a matching r-Auction in hardcover within the 75-250' setback area (20-30-50
s.f.).
Applicant ..-st also be advised in your motion that access stairway is
limited to 4 feet width and safety step to Vx4'.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD OC'TOBBR 19, 1987
#1205 MAXFIELD CONTINUED
There were no comments from the public regarding this
matter and the public hearing was closed.
It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to
recommend approval of the renewal variance per staff
recommendation. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0.
#1206 RATHERINE C. PERRT
2693 WMLLT AVENUE
VARIA1CS
PUBLIC HEARING 8:41-8:42
The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing
were noted.
Katherine Perry was present for this matter.
Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the
request for a 3' side street setback variance to
construct a screen porch with deck above. He noted that
the main reason requiring the variance is because this
is a corner lot.
There were no comments from the public regarding this
matter and the public hearing %as closed.
It was moved by Hanson seconded by Johnson, to
recommend approval per staff recommendation. Motion,
Ayes 6, Nays 0.
#1207 GONE i CATHNtINE SCANLON
2815 CASCO POINT ROAD
VARIANCE
PUBLIC 'JIBING
The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing
were noted.
Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that applicant has
requested that this application be tabled due to
illness.
There were no comments from the public regarding this
matter.
It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Hanson, to table this
application and continue the public hearing until the
November 16, 1987 Planning Commission meeting. Motion,
Ayes 6, Nays 0.
9
ZONING FILE NO. 1207
CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 10/28/87
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO: Gene 6 Catherine Scanlon COPIES TO:
2815 Casco Point Road
Wayzata, MN 55391
TYPE OF APPLICATION: XX Variance
-----------------------------------------------------------
DATE OF MEETING: 10/19/87 VOTE: 6 For Against
Planning Comission recos ends the following:
XX Tabled: at your request
NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as:
Planning Commission November !6, 1987; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 16, 1967
11107 LEWIS/TRETTEL CONTINUED
It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Taylor, to
recommend approval of the renewal variance per staff
recommendation subject to the following condition:
1. At the time of building permit review, sufficient
informatio.i shall be submitted to the City for staff
to make the determination that the drainage pattern
will not be "adversely affected" by improvements to
the property i.e. Condition i6 must be satisfied.
Motion, Ayes 1, Nays 0.
#120 GENE AND CATHERINE SCANLON
GSCO POINT ROAD
VARIANCES
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
Mabusth stated that applicant has requested that their
application be tabled until further notice.
#1209 TINA WHITE
2150 PROSPECT AVENUE
VARIANCE
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 8:04-8:06
Tina White was present for this matter.
Gaffron noted that applicant has provided a design plan
showing elevations of the proposed solarium, and has
submitted a diagram of the room layout of the existing
house per Planning Commission direction. Applicant
requesL.s a side setback variance to replace an
existing porch with a solarium.
Tina White noted that all other locations for the
solarium would require a variance, except the north side
which is not a desireable location for a sunroom; and
the main purpose for the solarium is to replace the
deteriorating porch.
Johnson agreed that the proposed location is the only
feasible location for the solarium, therefore, he is in
favor of the request.
Brown questioned the hardship feeling the porch could be
replaced in the same footprint that exists.
Tina White stateJ that the dimeiisions of the factory
built solarium to match the pitch of the house are
larger than the existing porch.
There were no comments from the public regarding this
matter and the pablic hearing was closed.
It was moved by Taylor, seconded by Hanson, to recommend
approval of the sideyaid setback variance as proposed
per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 5, gays 0.
k,
ZONING FILE NO. 12n'
CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 12/01/87
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO: Gene 6 Catherine Scanlon COPIES TO:
2815 Casco Point Road
Wayzata, MN 55391
TYPE OF APPLICATION: XX Variance
-----------------------------------------------------------
DATE OF MEETING: 11/16/87 VOTE: 5 For Against
Planning Commission recossmends the following:
XX Tabled for reasons noted below.
NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
At your reauest, the Planning Commission voted to table your variance
application unL'' further notice from you.
Please advise my office when you wish to meet to discuss your
application.
CITY of ORONO
Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323*Municipal Offices
On the North Shore of Lake Minnetunka
March 3, 1988
Mr. & Mrs. Gene Scanlon
2815 Casco Point Road
Wayzata, MN 55391
Re: Application #1207 - Variance
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Scanlon:
We have heard nothing from you since your phone call at the
end of 1987 regarding your request to delay review of your
application until next year.
Please advise the Building & Zoning Office as to your wishes
concerning the future review of the proposed application. We
will require a written letter from you advising of your decision.
If you wish to withdrawn the application and seek a refund, this
must also be requested in writing.
Please contact my office if you have any questions
concerning this matter.
Sincerely,
a a . IYA ...4,,�
J nAlr ne A. Mabusth,
Building & Zoning Administrator
JAM/tln
BUILDING & ZONING - 473-7357 • ADNLWISrRAT10N & FINA%CF - 473-735H • PUBI IC WORKS - 4'3'359
ASSESSING
�..(3ay
.e 4L ti
'Itz,
t-41
Alt --Q �
14i"44z",00"/��
DAVID R. OLSON. M.D.. P.A.
METROPOLITAN MED'^.A'. OFFICE BUILDING
823 SOUTH BTH STR! ET • SUITE 31 6
MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55404
(612) 339.1771
MEMBER INTERNATIONAL
ARTHROSCOPV ASSOCIATION
MEMBER ARTHROSCO►r ASSOCIATION
OF NORTH AMERICA
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Dear Madam:
DIPLOMATE AMERICAN
SOARD OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGER✓
FELLOW AMERICAN ACADEMY
OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONS
March 11, 1988
RE: Gene Scanlon
Mr. Gene Scanlon has been under my care since 1976 for his lower
back. He has had multiple inj;jries to his lower back and at
present does have degenerative disc disease and arthritis in the
lower back area.
Any significant lifting_ does cause his back to flare up and give
him more problems with back pain. It is my suggestion that he does
limit his lifting as :.jch as possible because of his back condition.
I ,
Yo rs trul
I
D vid R. Olson, M.D.
DRO/vh
April 29, 1988
To: Orono Planning Commission
Chair person Kelly
From: Gene and Catherine Scanlon
2815 Casco Pt. Rd.
Subject: Variance request for deck and secure storage facility and
rebuilding of steps lost in July 23, 1987, storm
On July 23, 1987, we sustained heavy loses to our property from
the devastating downpour. The retaining walls, a deck, a locked storage
blockhouse, stairs and portions of our dock became a heap of rubble.
None of this loss was covered by insurance.
We went to the Orono City Offices because we had been told, erroneously,
that local municipalities would be the administrators for the flood relief
for damages from the storm. At that time we'issued permits to clear away
the debris, rip -rap our shore and rebuild the retaining walls to prevent
further erosion of the hill and lake front. We were grateful for the relief
the council provided by waiving fees for those permits and thank them. At
that time, we were informed that a variance request would have to be made to
restore the deck and storage facility. We thought Oat the rebuilding of
the stairway was included in the permits granting the restoration of the
bank and the rip -rap. We have not put in a stairway because the design is
dependent on the granting of the variance request.
The work of clearing the debris, rip -rapping the shore and re -building
the bank has been completed and inspected. Now the restoration of the deck
and a secure adequate storage facility and the stairs remain to be completed.
In asking you to grant the variance request, we wish you to consider
these pertinant facts:
1.) A variance request was granted in August in 1978 for the
construction of a deck where no previous deck had existed.
The ordinate under which our request is being considered
(Ordinance 10.22, Subdivision land 2)was in effect at that
time. The bank had been washed away by a huge storm. The
petitioner did not cite hardship or loss, but only a desire
to make the lakefront more usable and pleasant.
2.) rhere is no way that the terraces provided can even remotely
be compared to a deck. No children could use them, they
cannot be fenced. No one could sit on them with furniture
to enjoy the lake. It is our intent to replant and landscape
them. The construction we did was necessitated by the massive
hole created and was never intended to be used as a deck. The
configuration of the retaining walls was necessitated for the
same reason.
3.) It was apparent from the wreckage that no deadmen were used
to anchor the retaining walls to the bank. The new walls have
deadmen and drain tiles inspected and approved according to
city inspection specifications. No where could we find a
record of such inspections having been done of the previous
construction. With the extra precautions, the deadmen and
drainage tiles, it should not be necessary for an appearance
before this group for any variance request of this type.
4.) The bank is approximately 35 feet high. A lock box would noL
provide adequate safety for storage because it could be easily
entered without our being aware of it. We propose to have a
storage area under the deck. We have submitted a plan which
would not require anymore hard cover than that which has been
granted in the permit for terracing the bank.
5.) ":.closed is a letter from Gene's orthopedic surgeon outlining
the physical problems it would be for Gene to carry items
needing storage security up the steps to the house.
6.) A market analysis, done by Edina Realty indicates that for
comparable properties with or without a deck, the difference
in the sale price is approximately $30,000. Since we already
know that the cost of replacing the retainin-, walls, deck and
storage and steps will equal that figure, if not exceed that
amount, it seems reasonable to assume that it represents a
considerable lessening of the value of our property without
that replacement.
We earnestly request the consideration of these factors as you review
the variance proposal to replace the devastating and costly loss we have
incurred from that storm.
Sincerely,
/ Cif ��� � ` <• , • . /
�� ���
J.�
To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley
Orono Planning Commission Members
City Administrator Bernhardsor.
From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building 6 Zoning Administrator
Date: June 1, 1988
Subject: #1207 Gene 6 Catherine Scanlon, 2815 Casco Point Road -
Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing Renotification
List of Rzhibits
Exhibit A - Staff Memo 10/15/87
Exhibit B - Survey
Exhibit C - Applicant's Letter 3/9/88
Exhibit D - Doctor's Letter 3/11/88
Exhibit E - Applicant's Addendum
Exhibit F - Elevation of Lake Structure
Exhibit G - Plans for Improvement
Exhibit H - Staff Memo - 1978 Review
Exhibit I - Planning Commission Minutes 9/11/78
Exhibit J - Planning Commission Minutes 9/25/78
Exhibit K - Council Minutes 9/26/78
Exhibit L - Council Action Notice 9/27/78
Exhibit M - Profile/Floor Plan Original neck
Special Comments
The application was tabled indefinitely at the November 16, 1987 Planning
Commission meeting awaiting further notice from the applicant. The long
delay for the review of the applicaticn was a result of Mr. Scanlon's ill
health. Please review the attached original staff memo dated October 15,
1987. Since the writing of that original memo staff has had discussions
with Mrs. Scanlon and was advised of an earlier variance review that
approved the original deck within the lakeshore. The original owners
received variance approval from the City on 9/26/78 to construct a lakeside
deck. The Scanlons did not own the property at that point and purchased
the property based on the deck improvement (review Exhibit E). The minutes
(review Exhibits I, J, i K) reveal the deck being approved by the City at a
15' by 11' dimension totaling a 165 s.f. in hardcover. The face of the
current application shows the original deck being constructed at 21' by 10'
dimension resulting in 210 s.f. of hardcover. The original block storage
shed was at the waterline, the proposed new 7' by 7' storage shed would be
under the proposed deck located further away from the shoreline. The
original deck was approved because of the steep terrain. The approval was
conditioned on the requirement that a 12" deep gravel sub -based be
maintained under the 15' by 11' deck and that plantings be provided along
the lakeside of the deck to screen the structure from the lake side view.
Review of Variances Sought with Current Application
Section 10.22, Subdivision I (B) Lakeshore setback
Required - 75'
Original Deck setback - 15' (60' or 80% variance)
Original Shed setback - 0' (75' or 100% variance)
Proposed Deck - 20' (55' or 73% variance)
Zoning File #1207
Page 2 of 3
Proposed Shed = 20' (55' or 73% variance)
Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 Hardcover u-75' setback area (4,200 s.f.)
Allowed = 0 s.f.
Original Hardcover (excluding retaining walls and steps) = 257 s.f. or 6%
Proposed Hardcover (excluding retaining walls at approximately 116 s.f. and
steps if maintained at under 4' width and safety stop limited to 4' by 4'
with banks at 1 to 1 slope) = 140 s.f. or 38 (Hardcover of shed not
included since is it placed under proposed deck)
Staff has discussed the issue of the previous variance approvals in 1978
with the city attorney noting that there were no substanti* changes to the
LR district ordinances since they were adopted in January of 1975. Mr.
Barrett advised that the hardcover and setback variances approved in 1978
clearly do have an impact on the current review. Staff would suggest other
issues for consideration of this application:
1. Applicants claim of a special physical limitation because of back
condition, review Exhibit D. Staff cannot remember a physical
handicap being claimed in previous variance applications. Is it a
valid consideration?
2. Purchased home and paid a price that included the original
retaining wall installations and deck improvement. The value of the
home has sustained a major diminution in value with the loss of the
lakeside deck.
3. Does the hardship of the steepness of the lakeshore bank still
hold true for the current review? Would this be an acceptable
hardship in current reviews?
4. Under what conditions has the Planning Commission approved new
structural improvements within the 75' setback area? In a recent
review for John Waldron, a lakeside deck at the top of the bank within
the 75' setback area was allowed to be improved as long as it wasn't
expanded upon. The City recently approved decking within a lakeshore
yard (Swanson)that expanded over a rip -rap area that applicant
contended replaced a previous wooden walkway. The City has approved
several grade level decks within the 75' setback area along the
Fagerness Point Shoreline because they provided no visual impact.
5. Does the condition under which the applicant lost the use of the
original structures have any bearing on your considerations.
Options of Action Available to the Planning Commission
1. To deny the hardcover and setback variance application of the
applicants based on the following findings:
a. Applicant has not demonstrated sufficient hardship.
b. Planning Commission would agree with the minority opinion in
the 1978 review that approval of such variances would establish a
negative precedent in the review of other similar applications in
the future.
C. The approval of variances granted in 1978 did not convey to
the owner or future owner any vested right to rebuild structures
if destroyed at some time of the future. The City does not
recognize a Grandfathering principal for structures that do not
conform to current setback standards.
Zoning File i1207
Page 3 of 3
d. The current policy practices of the City would not permit
the approval of the variances sought by applicant.
2. To recommend approval of the variances as amended by this
Commission based on the following findings:
a. The applicant has reduced hardcover with the new proposal
for improvements within the lakeshore yard.
b. The existing structures were removed ais a result of a severe
storm that eroded the lakeshore bank and had nothing to do with
the improper maintenance of the subject structure.
C. There have been no substantial changes in the code since
1975 when the LR districts and lakeshore standards were
established.
d. The City had approved similar variances for the property in
1978.
e. The steep topography requires special consideration for the
residents of the property.
f. The applicant's physical limitations as documented by his
personal physician's report wuu!a prevent his full enjoyment of
his original lakeshore •,roperty if the deck and shed were not
restored to lakeshore yard.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. Applicants f l for plans for the deck and stairs must be amended to show
a deck at a 14' by 10' dimension and a safety stop not to exceed 4' by 41.
2. 7' by 7' shed tc be placed under the proposed 14' by 10' deck must be
so placed that applicant can provide screening along the lakeside of the
retaining wall level that holds the deck structure.
3. Run-off from the roof of the sh(d must be directed away from the grade
level of the retaining wall and drLined to a drainage structure already
within the retaining wall substructure or via an independent drainage tile.
4. Plantings must be provided adjscent to each of the retaining wall
levels to provide the necessary screening and ground cover stablization.
5. Based on the addition of 140 s.f. of structural hardcover within the
0-75' setback area, applica.t must remove 140 s.f. of existing excess
hardcover within the 75-250' setback area.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 6, 1988
#1025 HENRICH CONTINUED
Bellows noted that according to the plans, applicant
proposes a 3-bedroom 2-story home on this lot, which is
the smallest lot in the area. She also felt it was
inevitable that future requests will come for a deck or
porch and a garage. She stated that applicant has been
using this separate lot as part of his homestead lot.
She suggested the concept of a mother-in-law apartment
as a possible solution in this case.
Attorney MacDonald stated that this lot is not
dissimilar to the neighborhood and that a fully sewered
lot has never been denied buildability in similar
circumstances.
It was noted that a major fact in this application is
that the owner owns adjacent property to this
substandard lot.
Attorney MacDonald suggested that the lot line could be
adjusted if the 1,000 s.f. is the issue.
Attorney MacDonald was advised that this could not be
accomplished.
Attorney MacDonald stated that the Planning Commission
and/or Council was bound to address the significance of
precedents from previously approved similar
applications.
There were no comments from the public regarding this
matter and the public hearing was closed.
It was moved
application
Ayes 4, Nays
(2815
07 GENE i CATHEAINE SCANLON
CASCO POINT ROAD
DITIONAL USE PEAMIT/VARIANCE
LIC AEARIIG 8:02-8:13
The Affidavit
were noted.
by Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to deny
11025 per staff recommendation. Motion,
0.
of Publication and Certificate of Mailing
Mabusth reviewed the application to repair the
shoreline, deck and boat house damaged in the July 1987
storm. She explained the rn-,ditions of variance
approval for the deck that previously existed within the
lakeshore area.
Gene and Katherine Scanlon were present for this matter.
They showed photos of the property and noted that the
proposed replacement deck will be no closer to the side
property line than what previously existed.
3
MINUTES Or THE PLANNING COMMISSION MERTIMG HELD JUNE 6, 1988
11207 SCANLON CONTINUED
Bellows stated the applicants have the right to have
reasonable access to the lake, but felt the deck and
terracing plan was excessive. She noted that the deck
plans were not the same size as applicant's proposal.
Kelley and Bellows recommended tabling the application
pending accurate information on the deck.
There were no comments from the public regarding this
matter.
It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Moos, to table this
application pending receipt of an accurate deck plan
that meets safety code standards and does not exceed
the originally approved 151x 11' dimensions; and a site
plan with the proposed structure. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays
0.
#1268 DONALD PETERSON
3048 NORTH SHORE DRIVE
VARIANCE
SECOND REVIEW Donald Peterson was present for this matter.
Gaffron explained the revised hardcover calculations
from the previous review including the proposed future
deck configuration.
Kelley asked applicant what he planned for the area
around the house where the plastic is proposed to be
removed?
Mr. Peterson stated he will probably plant Hostas around
the house and assured the Commission that he will not
put the plastic back after approval.
Kelley reviewed the new facts, Planning Commission's
previous recommendation, and staff recommendation.
Mr. reterson stated he felt the restriction not to allow
anymore hardcover in the 250-500' area was too
restrictive and would not build his addition if this
restriction was approved. He does not want to be this
restricted in case he may want a future accessory
structure.
Planning Commission felt the applicant's request was
reasonable.
It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Moos, to recommend
approval of the hardcover variance per staff
recommendation #1 and 02, s►bject to no additional
hardcover being allowed within the 0-250' zone. Motion,
Ayes 4, Nays 0.
J
ZONING FILE NO. 1207
CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 6/7/88
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO: Mr. i Mrs. Gene Scanlon
2815 Casco Point Road
Wayzata, MN 55391
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance
Conditional Use Permit
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE OF MSETING: 6/6/88 VOTE 4 For 0 Against
Planning Comission recos nds the following:
Tabled for reasons noted below.
NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
Please provide the following information by the June 14, 1988 deadline for
the Planning Commission meeting of June 20, 1988.
a. Provide an amended survey locating proposed deck - please note
that the side setback for your zoning district is 10' - setback from
shoreline must also be shown.
b. Your plans must be amended to show the following:
1. 14' by 10' deck.
2. Safety stops limited to 4' by 4' - stair widths limited to
4'.
3. Stair risers must meet standards of U.B.C. for maximum rise.
Please contact Jeanne Mabusth if you have any questions on this request.
/V
TO: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley
Orono Planning Commission Members
City Administrator Bernhardson
FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator
DATE: June 15, 1988
SUBJECT: 11207 Gene and Catherine Scanlon, 2815 Casco Point Road
- Variances - Second Review
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A - Revised Survey
Exhibit B - Sketch of Revised Plan/Elevation
Exhibit C - Hardcover Removal Sheet
Pertinent Ordinances
Section 10.03 Subdivision 15(F) side yard setback for accessory
strucutres required - 10 feet
Proposed structure = 10 feet
Applicant will not require a side yard setback variance.
Section 10.22 Subdivision l(B) required = 75 feet
Original deck setback = 15 feet (60 ft or 80% variance)
Original shed setback = 0 feet (75 ft or 100% variance)
Proposed deck = 20 feet (55 ft or 73% variance)
Proposed shed = + 20 feet (55 ft or 73% variance)
Section 10.22 Subdivision 2
0-75' setback area = 4,200 sq ft
Allowed = 0 sq ft
Original hardcover (excluding retaining walls and steps = 259 sq
ft or 68 (210 sq ft deck, 49 sq ft shed)
Proposed hardcover 212.8 sq ft or 5% (228 sq ft minus 16 sq ft
for landing area of stairs structure)
New hardcover approved in 1978 = 165 sq ft or 3.9% (15xll ft
deck). Total approved hardcover in 1978 = 214 sq ft or 58 ( 165
sq ft, 49 sq ft shed)
75-250 foot setback area = 9,600 sq ft
Allowed = 2,400 or 25%
Existing = 4,200 or 43.7%
1
Applicant proposes removal of hardcover totaling = 128.9 sq ft or
1.348.* Review Exhibit A.
* Applicant will provide a complete survey of hardcover to `:)e
removed in addition to a date for completion of that removal.
Review of Revised Plan
The applicant has submitted an amended survey designating a 15 X
11 foot deck this was the size approved in the original 1978
review. In r^viewing the sketch of the revised ele-•ation/plan
with the applicant it was noted that the plan still shows a 15 x
14 foot deck. Applicant advised that because of the location of
the shed underneath the deck and the width of the retaining wall
to the rear side of the deck, or to the land side of the deck,
that the 14 foot depth is required. Based on an earlier drawing
in the first packet that was sent out on this application, this
tier of decking appears to be apporximately 10 feet in depth and
that if a wider width was required for some reason that applicant
could redesign the deck to accommodate the shed but that it would
be difficult for the City to approve any deck in excess of the
165 sq f,. ':hat was originally approved in 1978.
In reviewing Exhibit B tihe sketch of the revised plan the stair
structure has been reduced considerably modifying the impact and
the intensity of tt _akeshore structure. There is now a single
access stair down ,..e lakeshore bank, running parallel to the
cedar deck. A safety stop and stepping pad area provide the
necessary landing for the steep descent. Applicant will present
their position as to why they require the deck at 14' x 15'
dimension. In addition, applicant will provide a more detailed
plan of the hardcover to be removed within the 74-250 foot
setback area sometime within the spring of next year. Staff also
advised the applicant, who was willing to have the surveyor make
another amendment of a survey that would show the 15 x 14 foot
deck, that this was not necessary. It should also be noted that
the applicant seeks, at a minimum, the repla-ement of the same
sized deck that was approved in 1978, which would be at 15 x 11
feet. The original request of 14 x 10 feet was in error. Please
review the staff memo dated June 1, 1988 that was drafted for
your June 6th meeting. Please review the section on the options
available to Planning Commission to assist in th, drafting of
your recommendation.
If Planning Commission members seek additional information please
advise staff prior to the meeting so that we can formally act on
the Scanlon application at our June 20th meeting. „s staff
would like to present this application before the Council at
their June 27, 1988 meeting.
r,
� r�c��od�
June 16, 1988
To: Orono Planning Commission
From: Gene & Cathy Scanlon
2815-Casco Point Road
Re: Variance Request
When we began the process of getting approval for the
variance, our seemingly simple and just intent was to replace
what was lost to us in the July storm.
We are truly grateful that the planning commission has
allowed that the main intent of that request is a reasonable
one.
During the process of acquiring the variance, we have come to
realize that the responsibility for maintaining the intent of
the city ordinances is one taken very seriously by this
commission. Therefore, that fact has required us to modify
our expectations and release our previously held position of
total replacement. We have not ever wanted to violate the
statutes and/or ordinances of the City of Orono. We propose
some trade-offs and compromise to answer needs and address
the concerns of the commission.
We k09V that what we would jjkg is approval of the deck,
storage and step plan we presented at the June 6, meeting of
the planning commission.
1) A 15'x14' deck - as shown
2) A secure locked storage area under the deck
3) A safety landing to the side which would allow access
to the storage area a d a break from the steep ��-dv
incline of the steps.r
The previous variance granted allowed a 15'xll' deck. We
could change the plan to reflect that grant and would accept
that. The survey sheet shows a 15'xll' Jack. I might add
that the additional three ft. would not add any more
hardcover because it would be constructed over existing
hardcover.
Orono Planning Commission
Page 2
1) As the plan exists, we would need the area showing
stepping pads as access to the storage shed under the
deck.
2) The stairs, which continue on, and the safety landing
would leave the area in front of the opening to the shed
clear and provide access to the deck above. The stairs
would not add more hardcover because it would rest on
hardcover that is already there.
Therefore, the proposed deck (15'x14') with an under -dock
storage area and a continuance of the steps to a landing
and another set of steps to the deck, would not involve
any more hardcover than already exists.
The goal of the plan is to make the lakefront,
functionally and aesthetically, as great an asset as we
can. We feel that the retaining walls and the terracing
which has been constructed, have proved our willingness
to financially do the bebt we can. The deck is an
extension of that willingness.
3) The deck would be at least 10' fro■ the adjacent property
line and 20' or 23' fro■ the shoreline depending on the
size of the deck.
4) At the top of the bank, where the stairs will and, is a
19'x9.5' level which is covered with stone (hardcover, if
you will). Some of that area was washed away. When the
terracing was completed, that area war. filled in and
covered just as it had been before thoi storm occurred.
The contractor/landscaper went as far as he could until a
determination about the deck, storage and stairway had
been made. When the other construction is complete, he
will return to finish his part of the job. We would
eliminate the rock, gate, fence and shrubbery now
existing. A gate at the top of the stairs and an
appropriate fence would delineate the top of the bank.
We would need these demarcation& for safety reasons. We
will then sod right up to the fence at the top of the
bank. This change would shrink the hardcover 180.5 sq.
ft. in the 0'-75' setback area.
5) Additionally, in the 75' to 250' area we would, during
month of July or by the end of August, shrink the amount
of hardcover in two places. To the right and to the left
of our entry -way steps are two areas we could put back to
a natural state. One area 9'x 3' (27 sq. ft.) and the
other approximately 8.5'x 3' (25.5 aq. ft.)
Orono Planning Commission
Page 3
6) There is a concrete cover which presumably capped a well.
We were unaware that the area under that concrete cap
hadn't been filled in, until, in the storm, the lower
level, including the furnace room, storage area, wood-
working room, laundry room and family room had flooded.
The "wall" was covered with wallboard and it was not
apparent that no blocks or fill existed behind it. By
late spring a, and certainly by early summer, we will
repair the exists i walls and remove Lhe cap to restore
it to a non -hard sr area. It measures approximately
ll'x 7.5' (104.5 . ft.). Those changes would shrink
the hardcover are approximately 159.5 sq. ft. We would
be happy to have those areas inspected and the commission
assured that work on those promises had been completed.
We cannot do the work cn the lower level now because,
quite frankly, we will have run our financial string out
completing the work on the front of our property.
We hope that the questions raised at the June Commission
meeting have been satisfied. We have been grateful for
the time, consideration and patience given to the
solution to our problem. We hope that as you review our
revised proposal and the reduction in hardcover levels,
that we are coming nearer to closure on this project.
Sincerely,
-�-
Cathy and Gene Scanlon
CS/gb
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 20, 1988
ATTENDANCE 7: 0 5
P. M.
The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with
the following members present: Chairman Kelley,
Bellows, Johnson, and Moos. Hanson, Cohen, and Brown
arrived in a short period of time after the meeting
started respectively. The following represented the
City staff: Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth,
Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaffron,
Building & Fire Inspector Jacobs, and City Recorder
Peterson. Councilmembers Callahan and Goetten were also
present.
GENE i CATHERINE
SCANLON
2615 CASCO POINT
ROAD
CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT i VARIANCE
SBCOND REVIEW
Gene & Catherine Scanlon were present for this matter.
Mabusth reviewed the amended survey and revised
elevation/plan and the har0cover issues. It was noted
that the elevation plan did not reflect the reduced
sized deck per Planning Commission's direction at the
last meeting.
Jacobs noted that the proposed stairway does not meet
current code standards.
Kelley reviewed the Planning Commission's direction
regarding the deck and stairway at their last meeting.
It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Moos, to table this
matter pending a revised plan showing a 15'x 11' deck,
with a minimum dimension stairway plan that meets the
safety code standards. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 1. Johnson
voted nay because he felt the entire structure was too
visually massive in the lakeshore yard. Motion
carried.
#1270 RON TIMM
4496 NOR" SHORE DRIVE
VARIANCE
PUBLIC HEARING 7:21-7:24
The Affidavit of Publication an,- Certificate of Mailing
were noted.
Ronald Timm was present for thi natter. He noted the
letter of approval from his n- .hhor included in the
packet.
1
ZONING FILE NO. 1207
CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 6/21/88
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO: Mr. 6 Mrs. Gene Scanlon
2815 Casco Point Road
Wayzata, MN 55391
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance
Conditional Use L.rmit
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE OF NESTING: 6/20/88 VOTE 6 For 1 Against
Planning Comission recosssends the following:
Tabled for reasons noted below.
NOTES AND SPRCIAL CONDITIONS:
Submittal of revised plans that would redesign det;k/stairs to meet the
following standards:
a. Limit deck structure to 15 by 11 for a total of 165 s.f. of
hardcover.
b. Stair structure to be designed to lessen structural impact:
1. Stair with maximum 4' width.
2. Landing (safety stop, etc.) to be limited to 4' by 4' - to
be placed at 12' intervals/sections.
3. Applicant may wish to use the flat surfaces of the retaining
wall tiers to provide the necessary landing stops and the
redesign of the staircase.
4. Show the location of the door to the storage shed under
deck.
C. Applicant may wish to show proposed landscaping along the
retaining wall tiers also.
Staff would recommend that your designer/planner contact Tom Jacobs
regarding structural design of the staircase. In light of the last two
meetings of the Planning Commission, it may be helpful to present
elevations of the redesign of the deck/access stairs.
Please contact the Building z Zoning Office if you have any additional
questions.
The application is scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting of July
18, 1988; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m.
The deadline for submittal of new information is July 5, 1988.
To: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator
Fracas Tom Jacobs, Building & Fire Inspec,:or
Date: July 12, 1988
Subject: 11207 2815 Casco Point Road
Proposed Deck, Storage Area, and Stairway
I have reviewed the above proposed plans submitted by the applicants.
With exception to the stamped corrections on the plan, the plan meets the
requirements of the State Building Code.
To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley
Orono Planning Commission Members
City Administrator Bernhardson
Frm: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator
Date: July 12, 1988
Subject: 11207 Gene and Catherine Scanlon 2815 Casco Point Road
- Variances - Third Review
List of Eshibits
Exhibit A - Planning Commission Notice of Action 6/21/88
Exhibit B - Revised Survey
Exhibit C - Plan Drawing
Exhibit D - Elevation
Exhibit E - Aproximate Location of Hardcover to be Removed
Exhibit F - Jacobs Memo
Review of Variances Sought by Applicant
1. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) Lakeshore setback for structures -
Required - 75'
Original Shed - 0' (75' or 100% variance)
Proposed Shed - 24' (51' or 68% variance)
Original Deck - 15' (60' or 80% variance)
Proposed Deck - 24' (51' or 68% variance)
2. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 Lakeshore hardcover-
0-75' setback area - 4,200 s.f.
Allowed - 0 s.f.
Original Hardcovet - 249 s.f. or 61 (210 s.f. deck, 49 s.f. shed)
Proposed Hardcover - 165 s.f. or 3.9% (Shed located under deck not included
and stairs/safety landing of 149 s.f. excluded)
75-250' setback area - 9,600 s.f.
Allowed 2,400 s.f. or 25%
Existing 4,200 s.f. or 43.71
Proposed = 4,043 s.f. or 42.1%
Removal of 150 s.f. (52.5 s.f. adjacent to access stairs at rear of house
and 104.5 s.f. at northeast corner of residence, see staff sketch Exhibit
E)
Please note the 185 s.f. of additional hardcover to be removed within
applicants lakeshore yard has not been included in the above calculations
because they were not included in the original hardcover calculations
totaling 4,200 s.f.
Review of Application
At your June 20th meeting, all but one member of the Planning Commission
conceptually approved the variance request of the applicant subject to
their submitting revised Flans that clearly def4ned what the applicant was
proposing within the guidelines of the Planning Commission directives.
Zoning File #1307
Page 2 of 2
Review Exhibits C and D. The applicants Flans now show a deck that does
not exceed 165 s.f. of area. The stairs have the appropriate number of
risers within the 12 foot intervals. Applicant has reduced the amount of
additional hardcover by employing the gravel area of the retaining wall
landings requiring only one deck stair 3' 6" by 3' 3". Tn addition, review
Exhibit F, the building inspector has reviewed the revised plans submitted
by the applicant and has approved them finding that they meet all
requirements of the state building code.
As the majority of the Planning Commission have conceptually approved the
proposed reconstruction of a deck, access stair, and shed within the
Scanlons lakeshore yard, staff will repeat some of the suggested findings
from an original staff memo dated June 1, 1988 if application was to be
approved.
A. The applicant has reduced hardcover with the new proposal fot the
improvements within the lakeshore yard and within the 75-250' setback
area.
B. The existing structures were removed as a result of a severe
storm that eroded the lakeshore bank and had nothing to do with the
improper maintenance of the subject structures.
C. There have been no substantial charges in the code since 1975
when the LP districts and lakeshore standards were established.
J. The City had approved similar variances for the property in
1978.
E. The steep topography requires special consideration for the
residents of the property.
F. The applicant's physical limitations as documented by his
personal physician's report would prevent his full enjoyment of his
lakeshore property if the deck and shed were not restored to lakeshore
yard.
The following conditions are also recommended with the approval of this
application:
1. Run-off from the roof of the shed must be directed away froir the
grade level of the retaining wall and drained to a drainage struc ure
already within the retaining wall substructure or via an independent
drainage tile. This will prevent any undermining of the existing
retaining wall structure.
2. Plantings must be provided adjacent to each of the retaining wall
levels to provide the necessary screening and ground cover
stablization.
3. The applicant has agreed to remove 157 s.f. of existing hardcover
within the 75-250' setback area. Such hardcover removals must be
completed by
Please advise staff if additional information is required or if you have
any questions concerning the new material submitted by the applicants prior
to the meeting.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 18, 1.988
#1301 DAVID L. WHITE 6 FREDRICK C. WHITE -CONTINUED
concurred with Mr. Cohen's request for a topographic map. The PC has to be
sure that the development of this land is in line with the comprehensive
plan of the City. He felt it is important to limit access from County
Roads, especially 19, because that traffic will increase over time.
Commissioner Johnson agreed that a more comprehensive workup was needed as
to development alternatives for the property.
Kelley asked for further public comments, there were none. Johnson
questioned whether it was Hennepin County's position to limit access to the
County Roads involved as much as possible. Gaffron responded that although
they have not yet responded in this application, typically they would like
to limit as far as possible the number of accesses. It was moved by
Kelley, seconded by Cohen, to table #1301 pending Applicant's further
consideration of a comnrehensive development plan and submittal of a
topographical map, and review by the City as to the position and cost of
the roadway. Motion, Aye&=6.,__Nays=0, Motion passed.
�41207 GENE i CATHBRIKE SCANLON
2815 CASCO POINT ROAD
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT i VARIANCE
THIRD REVIEW
Gene and Catherine Scanlon were present for this matter.
Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the Applicants were seeking
the replacement of structures that were damaged in the storm of July 23,
1987. The specific structures involve a lake shore deck, access stairs and
a 7' x 7' storage shed. Applicants now propose placing the storage shed
underneath the existing or proposed deck, which will allow for a reduction
in the hardcover from what was there prior to the storm. The total
hardcover for the proposed deck is 165 sq. ft. The plans have been
reviewed by the building inspector.
Commissioner Kelley asked what the 165 ft. included. Mabusth stated
it includes just the decking, and not the 149 sq. It. of access stairs.
Kelley questioned recommendation t2 regarding plantings. Mabusth replied
that this procedure is very consistent with what they are now asking of all
persons who replace retaining walls in lakeshore yards. She noted that the
Applicants have volunteered to reduce hardcover within the 75-250, setback
area. Hanson commended the Applicants on making every effort to work on
this. Mabusth added that the Scanlons are going directly to the Council on
this.
In regard to the date the hardcover removals are to take place, Hanson
asked Applicants for a date they felt was realistic. Applicants replied
next Spring, and June 30, 1989, was agreed upon. The specific hardships
that apply in this particular variance are the extreme slope of the land
and the necessary work required to stabilize that area after the storm.
Johnson stated that he did not think this variance was consistent with
the 0'-75' policies in that there is a retaining wall, stairs, storage
structure and deck all within 25' of the Lake. It was moved by Hanson,
seconded by Cohen, to recommend approval of 11207, Gene & Catherine
2
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION RESTING HELD JULY 18, 1988
#1207 GENE 7 CATHERINE SCANLON-CONTINUED
Scanlon, per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-1, Motion passed.
#1286 GARY RODERICK CONSTRUCTION
1749 NORTH FARM ROAD
VARIANCE
SNCOND REVIEM
Applicant was present for this matter.
This is a continuation of a Public Hearing. The request is to build a
6' high fence on the property along County Road 6. The proposed location of
the fence is considered to be a front or sidestreet yard. There are some
existing, but immature, trees and shrubs in this proposed fence location.
Applicant's concerns are that children could run out onto County Road 6.
Noise from County Road 6 is also a problem, as well as headlights from
traffic travelling west on County Road 6. Adjacent property owners are
concerned that a 6' fence does not fit into Orono's landscaping scheme of
openness and natural fencing using vegetation. Applicant stated that in
his opinion the fence would not create any sighting interference.
Applicant went on to say that the property in question contains a now
vacant residence, but he hopes to sell it in the near future. Prospective
buyers have inquired about a fence and the Applicant is merely pursuing
this matter to see whether fencing is a realistic idea. Applicant pointed
out that the present fencing ordinance would allow him to put a fence on
the south side of the property with no need for a variance whatsoever. He
feels this is backward. Ben Field, an adjacent property owner, indicated
that he is opposed to this variance. He believes the fence will detract
from the natural openess of the area. All 7 houses in that area have been
built so as to compliment the natural surroundings. "Farm at Long Lake"
developer Timothy Adams reiterated Mr. Field's convictions.
Commissioner Johnson concurred with Mr. Field and Mr. Adams regarding
approval of this variance. Cohen stated that Applicant has the right to
put up a 3-1/2 foot fence, which he thinks would alleviate any potential
safety problems. The natural vegetation that exists on the property will
grow and will provide a natural barrier. He is against a 6' fence.
Applicant made a final comment about 6' fences that already exist in Orono.
It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Cohen to recommend denial of the
variance #1286, Roderick Construction. Motion, Ayes=7, Nays-0, Motion
passed. Kelley informed Applicant of his next procedural step which would
be an appearance before the City Council.
#1291 ALFRED IVERSON
2835 CASCO POINT ROAD
REFERRAL BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION
Applicants were not present. Mabusth explained that this was a
referral back due to the possibility of the need for a height variance.
She stated that staff was able to confirm that there is no need for a
height variance. Mr. Kelley expressed his concern about the Iversons
3
To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members
City Administrator Bernhardson
Fro■i: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator
Data: July 21, 1988
Subject: #1207 Gene & Catherine Scanlon, 2815 Casco Point Road -
Variances - Arproval Resolution
Zoning District - LR-lC
Total Area - 14,228 s.f. or .32 acres
List of Kzhibits
Staff Memos Dated 6/l/88, 6/15/88, & 7/12/88
Exhibit
A
- Application
Exhibit
B
- Prope-ty Owners List
Exhibit
C
- Plat Map
Exhibit
D
- Dr. Olson's Letter Dated 3/11/80
Exhibit
E
- Scanlon's Letter Dated 4/29/88
Exhibit
F
- Jacobs's Memo Dated 7/12/88
Exhibit
G
- Survey
Exhibit
H
- Staff Memo - Variance Application No. 419
Exhibit
I
- Planning Commission Minutes of 9/11/78
Exhibit
J
- Planning Commission Minutes of 9/25/78
Exhibit
K
- Council Minutes of 9/26/78
Exhibit
L
- Council Action Notice Dated 9/26/78
Exhibit
M
- Original Plans of Application No. 419
Exhibit
N
- Plan of Hardcover to be Removed
Exhibit
0
- Building Plans
Exhibit
P
- Elevations
Review of Variances Sought by Applicants -
1. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) - Lakeshore Setback for Structures.
Required - 75'
Original Shed = 0' (75' of 100% variance)
Proposed Shed - 24' (51' or 68% variance)
Original Deck - 15' (60' or 80% variance)
Proposed Deck - 24' (51' or 68% variance)
2. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Hardcover.
0-75' Setback Area - 4,200 s.f.
Allowed = 0 s.f.
Original Hardcover = 249 s.f. or 68 (210 s.f. deck, 49 s.f.
shed)
Proposed Hardcover = 165 s.f. or 3.9% (shed located under
deck not included and
stairs'safety landing
149 s.f. excluded)
Zoning File #1207
July 21, 1988
Page 2 of 3
75-250' Setback Area - 9,600 s.f.
Allowed 2,400 s.f. or 25•
Existing - 4,200 s.f. or 43.70
:roposed - 4,043 s.f. or 42.1% (removal of 157 s.f., 52.5
s.f. adjacent to access stairs
at rear of house, and 105
s.f. located at northeast
corner of residence - see
Staff's sketch, Exhibit N)
Please note,185 s.f. of additional hardcover to be removed within
applicants' lakeshore yard has not been included in the above
calculations because they were not included in the original hardcover
calculations totaling 4,200 s.f.
Revtow of Application -
The applicants commenced the review of the application sometime in the
fall of 1987, but because of the ill health of Mr. Scanlon, they asked for
the tabling of the review until this spring. Planning Commission
considered this application at their June 6th, June 20th, and July llth
meetings. The difficulties throughout the 3-meeting review dealth with
information that conflicted with what was being proposed by the applicants
or a request on the part of the Planning Commission that the Building
Inspector confirm the proposed layout of the access stairs in relation to
the deck underneath shed. Please review Exhibits F, O, i P. The Inspector
has confirmed no problems with the design of the access stairs nor of the
deck. Note, applicants have employed use of the graveled surface of the
retaining wall levels and reduce% the need for deck safety landings, there-
by reducing the need for additic., :�l hardcover.
Upon the third review, the applicants had satisfied all of the
Planning Commission's requests and need for additional information or
amended plans. Staff drafted a recommendation of approval based on the
conceptual direction of the Planning Commission at their June 20th meeting.
The recommendation was adopted by the majority opinion of the Planning
Commission as setforth in the staff memo of July 12th (attached to this
memo). Please note, the Planning Commission established the date of June
30th, 1989 for the removal of the 157 s.f. of hardcover within the 75-250'
setback area. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning
Commission recommendation.
The minority opinion of one denied the application finding nc valid
hardship that would allow the reconstruction of the structures within the
lakeshore protected area and noted the City has never recognized the
grandfather standard before and should not establish such a precedent.
54502'78
City of OR ONO
RESOLUTION Of THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 2'a 74
TRANSFER ENTERED
PI PT OF PRCPI RTr TU A P-AttRECones
A RESOLUTION GRANTING 'EP a
VARIANCES TO
MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE HE►vNEPIN CBu v MINN
SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 (B) P' ' �``'un'
AND SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION i!
FILE #1207
WHEREAS, Gene 6 Catherine Scanlon (hereinafter "the applicants")
are the owners of he property located at 2815 Casco Point Road within the
City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows:
All that part of Lot 120, Spring Park, and all the unplatted land and
that portion of Lakeshore Avenue, vacated, lying between Lot 120 of
Spring Park and the side lines of said lot projected to Lake
Minnetonka, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in
Hennepin County, Minnesota, which lies Northwesterly of a line running
parallel with and distant 5' Northwesterly from the Southwesterly line
of said lot and the extensions thereof (hereinafter "the property");
and
WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to
Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) and Section 10.22,
Subdivision 2 to permit the reconstruction of a lakeshore deck and shed
installed under said deck located 24' from the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka
instead of meeting the required 75' setback requiring a 51' or 66% setback
variance, the lakeshore structural improvements result in 165 s.f. or 3.91
of hardcover where no hardcover is allowed. The structures to be
reconstructed within the lakeshore yard of the property were destroyed in
the storm of July 23rd, 1987.
Minnesota:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono,
FINDINGS
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1207.
2. The property is located in the LR-lC Single Family Lakeshore
Residential Zoning District requiring a 1/2 acre in area. The
property consists of 14,228 s.f. or .32 acres in area.
3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on July
18, 1988, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based
upon the following findings:
A) The applicants have reduced hardcover within the 0-75'
setback area by 84 s.f. or 2.10, and within the 75-250' setback
by 157 s.f. or 1.6%.
Page 1 of 4
c
City of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 174
B) The existing structures were removed as a result of a severe
storm that eroded the lakeshore bank and had nothing to do with
the improper maintenance of the subject structures.
C) There have been no substantial changes in the Code since 1975
when the LR districts and lakeshore standards were established.
In 1976, the City approved setback and hardcover variances for a
lakeshore deck located approximately 15' from the shoreline and
at 210 s.f. of hardcover.
D) The steep topography at lsl grades at the shoreline requires
special consideration for the residents of the property.
E) The applicant's physical limitation, as doc%.Aented by his
personal physician's report, would prevent his full enjoyment of
his lakeshore property if the deck and shed were not restored to
the lower lakeshore elevations.
4. The City Council has considered this application including the
findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by
City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed
variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community.
5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this
property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other
property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not
adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard
or other danger to neighboring property= would not merely serve as a
convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demon-
strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial
property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the
spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the
City.
COACLOSIOW, ORM AND COWI?IONS
Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono
City Council hereby grants variances per Municipal Zoning Code Section
10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) and Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit the
reconstruction of a lakesnore deck and shed installed under said deck
located 24' from the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka resulting in 165 s.f. or
3.91 of hardcover within the 0-75' setback area, subject to the following
conditions:
1. In order to prevent undermining of existing -staining wall
structure, run-off from the roof of the xhed must bs directed away
from the grade level of the retaining wall and drained to either a
drainage structure already within the retaining wall or via an
independant drainage tile.
Page 2 of 4
City of ORO O
RESOLUTION Of THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. '474
2. Plantings must be provided adjacent to each of the retaining wall
levels to provide the necessary screening and groundcover
stabalization.
3. The applicants have agreed to remove 157 s.f. of existing
hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. Such hardcover removals
must be completed by June 30, 1989.
4. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property not
with the applicants, 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 (July 25,
1989).
5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and
conditions of this resolution shall constitute a %iolation of the
zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted
herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor.
6. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree
to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their
heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this
resolution in the chain of title of the property.
Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 25th day of July, 1986.
Tt;�`:i
i
n, City Clprk Jaya s R. Grabek, Mayor
Property Owner(s)
Page 3 of 4
City of ORONO
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. -=474
On this 25th day of .1u1 ,- , 198 8
before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally
appeared Gene E. & Catherine Scanlon husband and wife
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
9/8/92
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this day of , 198, before me
a Notary Public within and for sa d County, personally appeared
known to we to be tho
person(s) described in and who executed the foregoirnginstrum,-gin ,
and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his
(their) free act and deed.
NOTARY PUBLIC
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES
Page 4 of 4
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY OF ORONO
I Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk of the City of Orono, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the
foregoing copy of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Orono
with the original record of such resolution in the Minutes of the
proceedings of said City Council at a meeting of said City Council held
on July 25 , 19 88 , and that the some is a true
and correct copy of said resolution was duly adopted by said City
Council at said meeting.
In Witness Whereof
8th , day of
I have hereunto set my hand and seal this
August 19 88
I'
thy M. lin, City Clerk
8
r-
0
OD
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING BEM JULY 25, 1988
1207 ENE SCAULON
2615 POINT ROAD
RESOLUTION 12474
The Applicants, were present for this matter.
City Administrator Bernhardson explained that this is a request for
construction, including hardcover, in he 01-75'zone, resulting from the
July 23, 1987 storm. They would like to replace the deck, which was 210
sq.ft., with a deck that is 165 sq. ft. The existing shed that was also
destroyed by the storm will now be tucked under the deck. Councilmember
Goetten stated that she does not feel the resolution should include any
language pertaining to the health of the Applicant. She does not want to
set any precedent by allowing such language. Therefore, sub -paragraph E
under Finding !3 of the Resolution, shall be removed.
It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember
Peterson, to approve the Resolution i2474 as amended. Motion, Ayes-4,
Nays-0, Motion passed.
#1280 V=T VURN
1376 BRIM t PAM R01i1D
VARIANCE
The Applicant was present for this matter. City Administrator
Bernhardson explained that this was a request for hardcover and structural
setback variances to construct an addition to the house, as well as decks
all around the house. A significant portion of the existing house already
sits in the 0'-75' zone. The proposal will reduce the amount of total
hardcover in the 0'-75' zone from 30.40 to 30.0% and a net decrease in the
75'-250' from 49.0• to 38.91. There is an increase in the amount of
structural hardcover Applicant pointed out that the deck is already there,
not proposed. They plan is to reduce the size of the deck. Councilmember
Goetten questioned whether it was necessary to have the road improved.
Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that it was not a problem at
this time.
It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember
Peterson, to approve the variance for Wendy Weihe. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0.
1291 ALFRED IVERSON
263S cAsco POINT ROAD
VARIANCE
RESOLUTION #2475
Ms. Iverson and the Contractor were present for this meeting.
This is a request for hardcover variance in the 75'-250' Zone. The
Planning Commission directed that the additional construction and
remodeling be done without increasing the amount of hardcover beyond 38.49.
Councilmember Callahan stated that after visiting with Mr. Iverson, there
was confusion as to how he would like tn proceed. Apparently the
calculations used for determining existing hardcover did not include the
landscaping plastic around the house. It did incl-ide the asphalt pathway
APPLICATION NO. #1201
CITY OF OEONO NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 07/28/88
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO: Mr. i Mrs. Gene Scanlon COPIES:
2815 Casco Point Road
Wayzata, MN 55391
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance
------------------------------------------------------------
DATE OF MEETING: 07/25/88 VOTE: 4 For 0 Against
COUNCIL ACTION - NOTION:
To approve your variance application subject to the finding and
conditions set fourth in the resolution sent to you prior to the meeting.
A copy of the original resoluuion will be sent to the City Attorney's
office for filing sometime within the next week.
Please note variance approval is limited to the extent shown on
approved plan and as noted in the approval resolution. Changes and
approved plans are subjec-- to further review by the City. Variance
approval expires one year after date of approval. Permit application must
be submitted no later than 7-25-89.
WAYNE O POPNAM
RATM0NO A HAIK
ROOCR W. SCMNOSRICM
OCNV(R KAUFMAN
ROSC a',A. NSH
ROLrE A.WDII
O. MARC WMITEMEAO
SRUC[ D. WILLIS
r R[OCR ICK S. RICHARDS
O. ROSE RT JONNSON
OAR♦ M. MACOMOCN
ROSC RT S. SUNK
HUGH V. P L U N
KETT, III
/RCOCRICK C DROWN
THOMAS K. SERO
JAMcs R. STCIL(N
JAM ES S. LOC N.+ART
ALLCN W. HIN OERAKER
C LIrrORO M. OR CENC
O.WILLIAM It AU/MAN
M I CHACL O. r RE C MAN
HOWARD $AM Mr[RS,III
LARRY D. CSPCL
J ANIC S. MAYERON
TMOM AS J. BARNETT
POPHAM, HAIK,SCHNOBRICH 61 KAUFMAN, LTD.
3300 PIPER JAFFRAY TOWER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 53402
JAMS A, PAYNE
TELEPHONE
D. RANDALL SOYEP
GREG ORY a. SCOTT
DAVID A .ONES
411113-333-4000
ORIAN N. JOHNSON
ROSANNC O. ZAIOCNWESER
LCE ( SNCENT
T.MOTIIT W MUCK
ROSENT C CASTLE'
ALAIN rRECON
TCLECOPIER
CAROLS SWANSON
TMCR(S( M. MANK(L
L[SLIE GILLETTE
1331 6I8-33A-Z713
SRUCE A. PETCRSON
JULIC FLCMINO-WOLrE
M ICHA(L T. NILAN
1351 SIZ']3A-Z7S1
JULIE A. SW(ITZER
DCSORAM A. DYSON
RO SCRT N. LYNN
THOMAS C. MIEL(NNAUS(N
ZACHEPY M. JONES
TMOMAS M. SIPKINS
1311 6I2-334-IS03
MICNACL O.CMRIST(NSON
EICNSON A. WHITN(Y
Moo CRT C MOILANCN
J. MICHAEL SCMWARTZ
KATHRYN M. WALM[R
TNOMAS r. N(LSON
TODD M JOHNSON
OILOROC J. SOCMA
THOMAS J 0A010
SUIT( 2000
JCrrREY P. CAIRNS
SHAN[ R. K(LLEY
OAV 10 L. MASNMALL
I200 SCV[P,TECNTM STREET
LOUIS P. SMITH
SUSAN M. WEIS
K ATMLCEN M. MARTIN
DIENVe R. COLORADO 60208
SPLICE M. LITTLE
MAw11 ►. TEN [YCK
J OMN C. CH. LDS
OOUaI•S P S(ATON
7(L(PMON( 303-003-1200
MARK I ►ALMA
wUSS(LL S. PONCSSA
DUANE R. NOCCK(w
THOMAS E SANNER
TCL(COPI[R 303-003-ZIS4
SRYAN L.CRAWrORO
w 1CHANO A. KAPLAN
MATTHEW C. DAMON
SRUC( S. MPNC[TERS
SUIT( 300 SOUTH
JC•.N W. PROVO
SC OTT C. RI :HT(R
1000 M STREET. N. W.
ELL[N SUE PARK(R
Or COON
rPEO L. MOwR,SON
PAUL J LINSTROTM
WASMINOTON. O. C. ZOO]
ORCOORY O. SROOKCP
S COTT A. SM,TN
TELEPHONE ZOZ-SZS-S300
WILLIAM M. OJILE. JR.
DONALO M L(W IS
TEPRANC( A. COsT(LLO
T(LtCOP,[R IOl-SZ6 -S]IS
ELIZASCTM A T.O.PSzN
JOSCPM D. VASS
KEITM J. MALL[LANO
DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
SR1AN W.OHM
-AOMITTEO IN IO.,A
MARK S. ►CTE R SON
fT(VCN A. CHELCSNIM1
-ADMITTED IN ILLINOIS
(612) 334-2549
L:-
r
ra
October
4, 1988 a�llll
I
Ol.� 5
I
Ms. Jeanne Mabusth
CITY OF ORONO
P. 0. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
Dear Jeanne:
Listed below are resolutions which have been filed in
abstract property with the County Pecorder and returned.
Name Resol. No. Doc. No. Date Filed
Bayside Landinq-Plat
Approval
2455
5444187
Auqust 17,
1988
Ronald Timm
2464
5450279
September
2,
1998
Gene & Catherine Scanlon 2474
5450278
September
2,
1988
Robert Owens
2477
5453358
September
13,
1988
Diane & Douq Merz
2476
5453357
September
13,
1988
If you have
any questions,
please feel
free to call
either
me or my secretary,
Paula Van De
Laarschot (334-2656).
Very truly yours,
kw� e�"1000,m /ov
Nancy E. Husnik
Leqal Assistant
ZPLV3
Encs.(5)
GENE SCANLON
2515 ,4s FT F ?AO
Certificate of Survey
for Gene Z Cathy Scanlon
in Lot 120, SPRING PARK
Hennepin County, Minnesota
s
WOONapp—
A�ae
9too,�;i. t
floaeA!
gtl�b t
Nnooe...�
p fe. p,
ti zo o sya L
p y P.
%��:ia
O
1" _ 30'
B-31-87 , t-11-I41 .e.-w—d /seA
Iron marker
1 hereby certify that this is a true and correct represent-
ation of a survey of the Wundaries of tre described property.
All that part of Lot 120, SPRING 1•ARK and all the un-
platted land and that portion of Laiesi;ore Avenue vacated
lying between Lot 12C of SPRING PART and the sidelines of
said lot projected tc Lake (•linnet it, a, according to the
plat thereof on file or of recurd it II•�nnepin County,
Minnesota, which lies Northwesteriy of a line running
parallel with and distant 5 feet Northwesterly from the
Southwesterly line of said Lot and •hc••axtensions there-
of.
and the location of any existing ouildimrs. It does no, pur-
port to show any other improvements or encroachments.
COFFIN & GRONB[k G, INC.
Mirk—�Zun.er�i 1 ;:=.
ln:liricer s, land Sur