HomeMy WebLinkAboutProject PacketCITY OF ORONO
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
473-7357
APPLICATION NO. 1954
NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION
Date of Notice: 9/13/94
--------------------------------------------------·---------------------------------------
TO: Lawrence Elsen
2879 Casco Point Road
Wayzata, MN 55391
COPIES:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance
-------------------------------------------------· -----------------
DATE OF MEETING: 9/12/94 VOTE: 5 FOR 0 AGAINST
---------------------------------------------------
COUNCIL ACTION -MOTION:
To approve per the findings and conditions of the resolution previously mailed to you.
Please arrange to sign the 3 original resolution copies at the City Offices (Monday through
Friday, 8:00 to 4:30). All persons with an interest must sign the resolutions. Please note that
building permits for new construction cannot commence until the resolutions have been fully
executed. Applications involving penalty building permits where structures have already been
installed, applicants are asked to proceed immediately with execution of the resolutions and filing
of the building permit application. If applicants are unable to visit the office between the regular
business hours, you are asked to contact Lin Vee, the Deputy Clerk, 473-7357 to make other
arrangements.
Variance Approval is limited to the extent shown on approved plan and as noted in the approval
resolution. Changes in approved plans are subject to further review by the City. Variance
approval expires one year after date of approval. A building permit application must be
submitted no later than September 12, 1995.
ch
MJNUTES OF TI-IE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
:MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 12, 1994
(Item #6 -Etherington -Continued)
Hurr asked how closely tied is this property drainage plan to the approval, questioning
what would happen if this property was not sold to these people. Mabusth stated she is
only working with the applicant, that drainage development was not ·allowed to the east
and west, and would hope to discourage another to do any type of squells and accept th.is
same plan. The drainage plan is tied to this applicant only. ·
Goetten asked about the shed on the property line. It was detennined that it belongs to
neighbor, Laue. Mabusth will request Laue to move the shed .
Hurr moved, Kelley seconded to approve the renewal variance application #1944 for
Bradley and Dina Etherington, Resolution #3462. A yes 5 , Nays 0 .
(*#7) #1949 SANFORD AND I\IIARGARET ERIKSON, 4455 FOREST LAKE
LANDING -VARIANCE -RESOLUTION #3463
Jabbour moved , Goetten seconded, to approve the variance application# 1949 for
Sanford and Margaret Erikson, 4455 Forest Lake Landing, Resolution #3463. Ayes 4 ,
Nays 0 .
(#8) #1950 GLEN UPTON, 3685 NORTH SHORE DRIVE -VARIA.i'lCES
It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to send back the application to the
Planning Commission for amendment. Ayes 5, Nays 0.
(*#9) #1954 LARRY ELSEN, 2879 CASCO POINT ROAD -VARIA.i'lCES -
RESOLUTION #3464
It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Application #1954 , Resolution
#3464. Ayes 4 , Nays 0.
(*#10) #1956 TOM AND CHRIS SMIEJA, 40.t0 \VA TERTO\VN ROAD -
VARIANCES -RESOLUTION #3465
It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt the Application #1956 ,
Resolution #3465. Ayes 4, Nays 0 .
5
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed:
Name Jeanne A. Mabusth
Title Building & Zoning Administrator
DATE: August 31, 1994
ITEM NO.:
Agenda Section:
Zoning
Item Description: #1954 Lawrence D. Elsen, 2879 Casco Point Road -Variance -
Resolution
Brief Review of Application
In the summer of 1993, the applicant received approval of a comprehensive variance
application that allowed a major garage addition and other structural additions to the lakeside of
the residence. A condition of that approval required that applicant remove a 20' x 8.4' shed at
the lakeside of his property. In the process of removing the shed, the existing privacy fencing
along the west public access side of the property was exposed and found to be in a severely
deteriorated condition. Applicant replaced fencing without a building permit and has reinstalled
vines and plantings on both sides of privacy fencing.
Applicant has confirmed with pictures and in the former survey of the property, Exhibit
H, that fencing was located on property. The new sections of fence have been installed in the
same location of the previous fencing except for an approximate 5' section that has been installed
parallel to the shoreline. Applicant advised that since the removal of the shed, younger users
of the public swimming beach have been trespassing onto his property. The former shed had
served to provide a physical barrier from public swimming beach users.
Please refer to Exhibit B. Applicant has provided a statement of hardship and unique
findings.
The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the variance, subject to
the condition that the 5' section that was installed parallel to shoreline be removed and that
applicant obtain a penalty building permit for the installation of fencing within 10 days of the
approval date of the City's resolution (September 22, 1994). The enclosed approval resolution
has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission's recommendation.
lsv
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
To adopt or amend the enclosed approval resolution.
lsv
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE
TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 (B)
FILE NO. 1954
WHEREAS, Lawrence D. Elsen (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the
property located at 2879 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono and legally described as
follows:
refer to Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property"); and
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for an after-the-fact variance
to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) to permit a 6' privacy fence located
within 5' of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka where a 75' setback is required.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono,
Minnesota:
FINDINGS
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1954.
2. The property is located in the LR-lC Lakeshore Residential Zoning District
requiring one-half acre or 21,780 s.f. in area. The property consists of 23,942
s.f. or .54 acres.
3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 15, 1994
and recommended approval of the variance application as amended, based upon
the following findings:
A. The privacy fence has existed in the north side lot line adjacent to the
public swimming beach for over 20 years, prior to the City's adoption
of shoreland standards for development.
B. The former privacy fence was in a serious state of disrepair and possible
collapse.
Page 1 of 4
C. The fence has provided a barrier at the public access beach and keeps the
public and their pets out of applicant's lakeshore yard.
D. The impact of the fence is minimized in the summertime with the
coverage of a grapevine and other adjacent plantings.
E. The applicant has assumed the responsibility for maintenance and upkeep
of the beach area and grassed lawn.
4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar
to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that
granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor
pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely
serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a
demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property
right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the
Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City.
5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and
recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments
by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS
Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council
hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) to permit
a privacy fence installed in applicant's north side yard adjacent to the public swimming beach
granting a setback variance of 70' or 93 % . Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. Applicant shall apply for a penalty building permit for construction of privacy
fence. Applicant must apply for a building permit by September 22, 1994.
2. A portion of the privacy fencing installed parallel to shoreline of lake must be
removed prior to applicant's filing of application for penalty building permit.
Page 2 of 4
3. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant,
but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building
permit by September 22, 1994 or this variance will expire on that date.
4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this
resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically
terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor.
5. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms
of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns,
hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the
property.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting
held on the 12th day of September, 1994.
ATTEST:
Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor
Applicant(s)
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of
September, 1994 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of
the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on
behalf of the City.
Notary Public
Page 3 of 4
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description
That part of Lot 110, Spring Park, lying Not'thwesterly of
the Sou the aster l y 90 feet thereof, according to the recorded
plat thereof, and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Also, Lot 101, and the Northwesterly 1/2 of Lot 100, includ
ing all land lying between the Northeast line of Lake Shore
Avenue and Lake Minnetonka and bounded on the Southeast by
the Southeast line of said Northwesterly 1/2 of Lot 100,
extended to Lake Minnetonka and bounded on the Northwest
by the Southeast line of Carman Avenue, and including the
vacated portion of Lake Shore Avenue lying adjacent to prem
ises, all in Spring Park, according to the recorded plat
thereof, and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
ZONING FILE #1954 CITY OF ORONO
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
473-7357
NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION
ACTION
DATE OF NOTICE: 8/18/94
·---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO: Lawrence Elsen
2879 Casco Point Road
Wayzata, MN 55391
COPIES TO:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance
--------------------------------------------------------------·--------------------
DATE OF MEETING: 8/15/94 VOTE:
Planning Commission recommends the following:
Approval subject to conditions noted below.
NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
Portion adjacent to Carman A venue may remain.
Portion parallel to shoreline must be removed.
Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as:
4 FOR
City Council Monday, September 12, 1994, meeting starts at 7:30 p.m.
0 AGAINST
If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available
from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission.
ch
To:
From:
Date:
Orono Planning Commission Members
Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers
Ron Moorse, City Administrator
Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator
August 4, 1994
#If
Subject: #1954 Lawrence D. Elsen, 2879 Casco Point Road -Variance -Public Hearing
Pertinent Ordinance
Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) -Lakeshore setback variance required for privacy fence.
Required = 7 5'
Proposed = 5'
Variance = 70' or 93%
List of Exhibits
A -Application
B -Applicant's Addendum
C -Property Owners' List
D -Plat Map
E -Neighbors ' Acknowledgement Forms
F Resolution No. 3303
G -Approved Site Plan for Application #1833
H -Survey
Description of Request
In July of 1993, the applicant received approval of multiple variances to allow a major
garage addition and other structural additions to the lakeside of the residence. Applicant was
asked to remove a 20' x 8 ' 4" shed at the lakeside of his property, because of hardcover
excesses. In the process of removing the shed, the existing privacy fencing along the
west/public access side of the property was exposed and found to be in a severely deteriorated
condition. Applicant replaced fencing without a building permit and has reinstalled vines and
plantings 011 both sides of privacy fence .
Review Exhibit E, many of the adjacent neighbors reaffirmed the need to replace the
former fencing because of its dilapidated condition and potential for collapse .
Refer to Exhibit H, hatch marks along the west lot line locate the privacy fencing that
had existed on the property. The new fence is installed within the same location except for an
approximate 5' section that has been installed parallel to the shoreline. Applicants have advised
that this has helped to discourage the younger users of the public access from trespassing into
their property. The former shed had served this purpose in the past.
Zoning File #1954
August 4, 1994
Page 2
Statement of Hardship
Please refer to Exhibit B. Applicant's addendum has provided a complete statement of
hardships and unique findings. Staff would add that private property owners who live adjacent
to public accesses within our City, specifically the public swimming beach accesses, have
installed fencing to define their private properties. The City has approved variances to allow
the repair or installation of fencing within the 0-75' setback area (Cherry Place and Lydiard).
Issues for Consideration
1. Is the fencing necessary . . . is the 5' -6' new extension of fencing parallel to the lake
necessary?
2. Other issues raised by Planning Commission.
Options of Action
Denial. Planning Commission members should refer to Section 10.08, Subdivision 3 (A)
(1-12) for the necessary findings and recommend a date for removal of the fencing;
OR
Approval, as proposed or amended. Approval is subject to applicant obtaining a penalty
building permit within 10 days of Council's approval.
lsv
CITY OF ORONO -VARIAN CE APPLICATION
Initial Application Fe~ $200.00
($50.00 per each additional variance)
Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 ·_
(no change from original application)
Variance for non-conforming structures $200.00
After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee)
PROPERTY INFOR.i\1ATION
Site Address ~8'.?Cf C,1sc.o ?~,-v, K.D. L;Jlh-J z.,1-,.,,, MA/. 5~39 /
01..J ,:-,· le... Property Identification Number (P.I.D .) 7
--------:------------V A tta ch legal description to application if not included on required survey.
Date P~ Acquired ~ I..J./ I q 3" I) (month/year) I (do) ~ also own--rtr:-+-'"a.._,d_Jlf_ -'-1-(C_e_m_._p_ar'--c-el_s_o_f_l_an_d __________ _
Pre s ent use of properry : l(__residential __ other (specify) __________ _
Zoning District: __________________________ _
APPLICA.1'IT
Name L1twfltAIC.€ ~· £LS£V
A ddress::).. ?29 CA:Z o Pz,,AI r /2_{}. City :
OWNER (if different than applicant)
Phone (home) L/?! -O(p'?'':f
Phone(work) ~ :2.. -~ ~ g-3
WAI/Y:T/1-Zip: 553 q I
/
Phone(horne) --------
Phone (work) ---------Name AJo.,.. Al'o20
A ddress: C ity: Zip: _ _.____________ ------------
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
Describe request in detail: S e..L ---""'-"'---<..i--'-~-~=...,....~-=-....-..c...'-'--'--"-="-='-1.---=:,..'---./---.+-----
0 Cl"-S; f-~
V A.RlAJ."'{ CES REQ lJIRED
Lot Area
Setback: From
Loe Width Hardcover
Side Rear
__ Loe Coverage
Average Lakeshore
1_ Other (specify) __,Fi---.::~:;..;A,l..:;.,,..,::=~='....;.v=---J-+-------------------
HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDffiONS
Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing
compliance with Zoning Code requirements: Rl!.FE"\... To An11 e..i+e-t::J urr-=
DttTcO ?-~ /-'i Lj
(attach additional sheets if necessary)
7
,r
I I , l
1 !
1 1
'
REQUIRED SUBI\1ITTALS
All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order
for vour application to be considered complete:
1. Completed Application Form
2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from
Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271).
3. ou F."/J'lat Map ( obtained with property owners list).
4. _L_ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover
calculations as required. In addition , provide one (1) copy 8 ½" x 11" for
reproduction.
5. Al.A._ Topographic survey ( existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade
are proposed . In addition , provide one (1) copy 8 ½" x 11" for reproduction.
6. L Sketches or plans of floor & ele vation views (pro vide one (1) copy 8 ½" x 11 ").
7 . 0 ,.; £/..!._,L ist of the legal names (include marital status) o f all persons with an interest in the
property . This would include name(s) of appl icant(s) if not current owner(s).
8 . b!.fi.. As an addendum co this application , please attach a separate list of any other persons
y ou wish notified of this application.
9 . _ Additional icems as may be requested by City scaff.
The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application . Please remember that vour
variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included.
APPLICALVT'S SIGNATURE
The applicant hereby agrees co provide all information required or requested by the Zoning
Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment)
and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application , and certifies that the
information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's SigpgttHe-~~ Date 7-~/-'/ 'f
OWNER'S SIGNATURE
The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable
entry onto the property by City staff, consultants , agents, Commission members, and Council :::r~~ :~ purpose:;;::z5f}i:tion of ~D::u;t: ~ I _ q Y
Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission
Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month.
Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission
and Council. If an applicanfis unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements
to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of
this change prior to the meeting.
8
I
I
Ii
: 1· i !
. 1 '
July 21, 1994
The City Council & Planning Commissioner
City of Orono
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
In response to your letter regarding the fence on our property, we are
requesting the City's consideration of a variance. This fence is
located within our property lines and provides a boundary and privacy
screen between us and Carman Avenue. Carman Avenue is an access road
from Casco Point Road down to the lake. Carman Avenue is presently
being used as a public swim beach, an area for people to park their
cars and bikes, and a place where people can walk down to the lake.
We purchased our home in July of 1987 and have never called the City
regarding any problems concerning this public area. We felt when we
purchased our house the existing fencing, our shed, and the line of
large evergreens along our property line would help substantially
eliminate any possible problems which could result from living next to
a public area. Last year we added to and remodeled our home. In the
process of improving our property, we needed a variance because of
hard cover in the middle zone. The City gave us the variance provided
we tore down our 20' x 8 1 -4 11 shed located in the southwest corner of
the lot down by the lake. We agreed to remove our shed and have done
so. After removing our shed, the existing fence became exposed and
was in need of major repairs. We will present pictures of both the
new and existing conditions of the fencing and landscaping at the
meeting August 15th. After examining the existing fence, we saw that
the posts were not treated lumber and most of them were rotted out at
the ground. This condition plus many broken horizontal boards created
a safety hazard for both the public side and our side of this fence.
For this reason, we choose to rebuild the fence in its same location
in lieu of slowly replacing vertical posts and horizontal boards.
This safety hazard could cause injury to some person or child or
create a law suit.
Page Two
July 21, 1994
This fence identifies to the public where the access is and keeps the
public and their pets out of our front yard. Sometimes the kids go so
far as to swim on our dock. I guess this isn't the end of the world
but who has the liability if someone gets hurt? People that live in
the immediate area get on and off the lake with their 4 wheel all
terrain vehicles and snowmobiles. We have no problem with this
provided they don't come up on our lawn, bushes, or gardens. This
fence again establishes a boundary. We are aware that the city has
five different signs up now all over the access road regarding many
different rules, but they only work sometimes for some people. This
fence is now half covered on both sides with existing 15+ year old
grape vines. We have planted grape vines this spring to cover the
other half where the shed was. Soon the fence will look entirely like
a hedge and its function will be a trellis.
Since we moved in, we have maintained this access, such as cleaned up
pop and beer cans, glass, garbage, sticks, and seaweed. This year we
formally adopted the beach and have installed many bushes and plants,
increased the grass coverage, cut the grass and trimmed the trees,
plus the normal garbage and seaweed cleanup.
We feel we have been a good neighbor and hope the City will understand
and approve this request for a variance.
Sincerely,
LDE:178
.
i~ .. -~'
-~ '
\ . .,._,,
r\i,·
~·•
' ·--~· i'
, , 38'::w-:111-23 31 0020·
·, ~~~:/~~~~i\'~2:7~~rp~::c~ ~O!NIY~~-.
TAXPAYER,:, /,TODD KNAPPER & DEBORAH LYON
. NAME/ADDl{_'/';_2874'.CASCO POINT RO
>;,;1_HAYZATA MN 55391.
r:·.:t:ii?''..}(·,]: ·
.•.• 3t:,20~117-23 31 0051' '
· 02915, /\ CASCO POINT RO
R C KAIL & C L' KAIL
TAXPAYER '],,:,.RICHARD' C KAIL & CAROL ~IL:
NAM!;/ADDR ;·, '2915 CASCO POINT. ROAD. . . 5,;j::;~!'~;~fj:~ .. 553.11
. . . 38•':>20.:.117.;.23 31 ·0054
PROP ADDR ... 0~879 ;,,_ CASCO POINT RO ,:
OWNER NAME '. : . L D. & K E ELSEN< .
TAXPAYER LAWRENCE O & KATHERINE'ELSEN
. NAME/ADDR.-: : ·· 2879 C_ASCO POINT ROAq . ' ,
·. _HAYZ_ATA MN 55391, .
·.''.
: L . i~;:: 38 <20-:111-23 31 0061 c',\ PROP ADDR 't\:'02868 >; CASCO POINT· RO
.·;:-OWNER NAME-'. , ; CHARLES F NELSON & HIFE·
}'\TAXPAYER. '\; ; CHARLES & LUCY NELSON.
, , N~ME/ADDR; :, 2868 CASCO POINT RO .
MN · . 55391 ... ,
HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY.INFORMATION .SYSTEM
I
··. PRO~ERTY OWNERS LIST
38 20-117-23 31. 0023
00038 •. ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
T W KNAPPER & D G LYON
TODD KNAPPER & DEBORAH LYON
2874' CASCO POINT RO
HAYZATA MN . 55391
38. 20-117-23 31 0052
02905 CASCO POINT RO.
JAMES.KENNETH BOWERS
JAMES K BOl~ERS
. 2905 CASCO POINT RO
.· HAYZATA MN' 55391
, 38 20-117-23 31 0055
02917 ·cASCO POINT RO
W N MAXNELL JR ETAL
WAYNE MAXWELL JR
2917 CASCO POINT RD
WAYZATA MN 55391
·TOTAL BATCH '003 00010
38 20-117-23 31 0026
02900 CASCO POINT RD·
D SIGAFOOS ETAL
DONALD SIGAFOOS
2900 CASCO PT RD.
HAYZATA MN · .55391
38 20-117-23 31 0053
02895 CASCO POINT RO
RICHARD G HELSTROM ETAL ,
RICHARD G HELSTROM
2895 CASCO POINT RD
WAYZATA _MN 55391_
38 20-117-23 31 0056''
02871 CASCO POINT RD
JP & R WOLFE
J PATRICK WOLFE
2871 CASCO POINT RD
WAYZATA MN ·55391
. I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE
REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON tHE RECORDS ,··
OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO Tl-IE BEST '
.OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND B:~::~141 (fi~y¾e{ ~ij.
l9sY>
have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located
ac ,;z,z--2 q C -1:.rr:o Pr also referred to as Land Use App lication No. l~S'{ .
I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) noc asked co
declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for cb.e Cicy
Council thac I (we) am (are) aware of the improvemem plans and thac the proposed neighbor's
project or use requires Council approval. ~ ~ e.-, / ,"7Ke... -Pe..<./ e_ e, / -.s
~ d ,,<J -5.--e~r ,'~/'""'v~~~,/2 ' . ~ . Jt;/~/ '
Property Owner Dace
Property Owner Dace
*********~********************************************************************
I (we) of -----------------------------[prim name(s)] [princ address]
have reviewed the plans for cb.e proposed improvernem or proposed use of the property located
ac __________ also referred co as Land Use Application No. /q...::, Cf
I
I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgernem, I (we) am (are) noc asked co
declare approval or disapproval of the property or use bm merely co con.firm fo r cb.e Cicy
Council chat I (we) am (are) aware of the improvemenc plans and thac the proposed neighbor's
project or use requires Council approval.
Propercy Owner Dace
Propercy Owner Dace
If y ou have any information that may assist cb.e City in the review of this Land Use
Application., please submit y our comments co the Building & Zoning Office a-c least 10 days prior
co the scheduled meeting date.
9
# ] r-· -. l~z;y' ~ ... '\ ! " l~ . ) ·.-,,,--. :~ ~--~\) ~ J) -~----__ ,.J
Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form
I (we) I ... • of : -------------=-:.:...==------=------:----:-------'--=---'--.:._
[print name(s)] [print address]
have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located
at ~?q CA---s-G:J PT also referred to as Land Use Application No. / 9 S'L/.
I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to
declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City
Council thac I (we) am (are) aware of the improvemem plans and that the proposed neighbor's
project or use requires Council approval. -..(.. vLC...R ~ -::t. ~ -~ j-/: ti ,_).-~d"
,_ 9</
Properry Owner Dace
Properry Owner Dace
******************************************************************************
I (w e) of -----------------------------
[princ name(s)] [princ address]
have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located
ac __________ also referred to as Land Use Application No . / 'to'( .
I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to
declare · approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the Ci ty
Council thac I (we) am (are) aware of the improvemenc plans and thac the proposed neighbor's
project or use requires Council approval.
Property Owner Dace
Property Owner Date
If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Us e
Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at lea.st 10 days prior
to the scheduled meeting date .
9
.,.Fl
I • '\
' \ ,i '"
... ' .. , ,J , .. -.....,_:;;,,.· .
t ' ,· ·'i ~ ''
J,,:, • a.cent l&r--€>fi>ertf@i½lers' ~&nowlef:igement Form
I(we) ~\M,v~ of --'~➔...,_,~[p-nnr=-. __::nam=-=--e(.....;s )-]----'='---'2-,Cj'e:5· Co~
[print address]
have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located
ac /}.._f{')q CA--c o Pc,,..,.T also referred to as Land Use Application No. /q ,S' y .
I (we) understand thac in executing this acknowledgemem, I (we) am (are) noc asked co
declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely co confirm for me Cicy
Council thac I (we) am (are) aware of the improvernenc plans and c.bac the proposed neighbor's f7
projecc or use requires Council approval. ~~ 1F'~ _ ~
··£~~:
Property Owner Dace
ro~~=(\ Dace
******~***~*******************************************************************
I (w e ) o f -----------------------------[princ name (s)J [princ address]
have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located
ac __________ also referred to as Land Use Application No . ___ _
I (we ) undersrand thac in executing this acknowledgemeo.c , I (we) am (are) noc asked to
declare approval or disapproval of che property or use buc merely to confirm for me Cicy
Counc il chac I (we ) am (are ) aware of che improvemenc plans and that the proposed neighbor 's
project or use requires Council approval.
Property Owner Dace
Property Owner Dace
If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use
Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior
to the scheduled meeting date.
9
have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the prop~rty located
at __________ also referred to as Land Use Application No.l~S 'f .
I (we) understand that in execming this acknowledgemem, I (we) am (are) noc asked co
declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely co confirm for the Cicy
Council thac I (we) am (are) aware of the improvernenc plans and that the proposed neighbor's
project or use requires Council approval.
Dace 7 ,
Property Owner Dace
***~*****************************************~********************************
or I (we) ---------------------------
[print name (s)] [prim address]
have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvemenc or proposed use of the propeny located
ac __________ also referred to as Land Use Application No. ___ _
I (w e) understand that in executing chis acknowledgement , I (we) am (are) noc asked co
declare approval or disapproval of c.he property or use buc merely co con.finn for the Cicy
Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvemem plan.s and that the propos1;d neighbor's
projecc or use requires Council approval.
Property Owner Dace
Property Owner Dace
If you have any info.rrnation tb.at may assist the City in the review of tbis Land Use
Applicacio~ please submit your comments co the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior
co the scheduled meeting dace.
9
ti). /(AJ4frtd!__ of 2871-tJ.,1-sdo Pr Rr>
[print name(s)] [print address]
have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located
at J/8'7 9 C -1:5 ca p,a1soreferredtoasLandUseApplicationNo. /qsc;.
I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (w e) am (are) not asked co
declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely co confirm for c.he Cicy
C ouncil that I (w e ) am (a re) aware of the improvemenc plans and thac the proposed neighbor's
project or use requires Council approval.
Property Owne r
Dace I l
71/ 1$' raJCE IS A-W ()A.Jl>£eru L
I fof P~VE 1-rdJ!.I !
Dace
******************************************************************************
I (w e) of -----------------------------[p rinc name (s)J [prim address]
b.a ve reviewed the plans for the proposed improvemenc or proposed use of the property located
at __________ also referred to as Land Use Application N o. ___ _
I (w e) undersi:and that in e:cecucing this acknowledgemem, I (we) am (are) not asked to
decla re approval or disapproval of t:he property or use buc merely to con11IIIl fo r c.he Cicy
Council chat I (w e) am (are) aware of the improvemenc plans and thac the proposed neighbor's
project or use requires Council approval.
Propercy Owner Dace
Property Owner Dace
If y ou have any information that may assist c.he Cicy in the review of this Land Use
Applicatio~ please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior
co the scheduled meeting date.
9
have reviewed the plans f?e proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located
at [),cfl7 ~ ,f±il)_so referred to as Land Use Application No. /q ~'f .
I (we) understand that in executing tbis acknowledgemem, I (we) am (are) not asked w
declare approval or disapproval of the properry or use but merely co confirm for the Ciry
Council thac I (we) am (are) aware of the improvemenc plans and that Ib.e proposed neighbor's
project or use requires Council approval.
Dace 1 1
Properry Owner Dace
*****************************************************************************~
I (w e) of -----------------------------
[pri.nc name (s)J [pri.nc address]
have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvernenc or proposed use of the property located
at ___________ also referred to as Land Use Application No . ___ _
I (we) understand char in executing tbis acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) nae asked to
declare approval o r disapproval of the properry or use but merely to confirm for the Ciry
Council that I (w e ) am (are ) aware of the improvemem plans and chat the proposed neighbor 's
project o r use requires Council approval.
Property Owner Dace
Property Owner Dace
If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use
Application., please submit your comments co the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior
co the scheduled meeting dace.
9
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
~ ~. 1./'"a (,") NO .. ~::.;, ~J v ~
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES
TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTIONS 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C),
SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 (B) AND SUBDMSION 2
FILE NO. 1833
WHEREAS, Laurence D. Elsen and Katherine E. Elsen (hereinafter "the
applicants") are the owners of the property located at 2879 Casco Point Road within the City
of Orono and legally described as follows:
refer to Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property"); and
WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal
Zoning Code Sections 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to permit structural improvements that will
result in 117.7 s.f. or .4% with total structural lot coverage at 3,709 s.f. or 15.4% where only
15 % is allowed and per Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) and 2 seeks a 16' average lakeshore
setback variance for a two-story enclosed addition where no such encroachment is allowed and
hardcover variances within the 75-250' setback area for structural replacement and new
structural additions resulting in 5,257.4 s.f. or 36.9% hardcover where 5,224 s.f. or 36.7%
exists and where 25 % is allowed.
Minnesota:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono,
FINDINGS
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1833.
2. The property is located in the LR-lC Lakeshore Residential Zoning District
requiring one-half acre or 21,780 s.f. in area. The property consists of 23,942
s.f. or .54 acres.
3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 21, 1993 and
recommended approval of the multiple variance application as amended based
upon the following findings: ·
A. 26' x 44' garage addition will be placed over existing paved area.
B. Hardcover within the 0-75' setback area has been reduced by 2 .4 % .. Final
hardcover at 24 s.f. or .3 % . •
Page 1 of 6
form 5005 Disk Orono
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
No ,';) 0 (:) 0 . .;F.,
• "'"' ~ l ·,. ~) 'r,"J
C. The proposed loop drive with limited backout apron will minimize tree
removal within street yard.
D. Installation of the new access drive will not result in an excess of
hardcover within the 250-500' setback area and will result in 371 s.f. or
12.4% hardcover where 30% is allowed.
E. All neighbors notified during this review have been shown the
improvement plans and have voiced no objections.
4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar
to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that
granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor
pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely
serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a
demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property
right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the
Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City.
5. 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 variances on the health, safety
and welfare of the community.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS
Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council
hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) and
Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) and 2 to permit the construction of a 26' x 44' garage/storage
addition to the street side of the residence and a two-story 16' x 26' addition at the lakeside and
the reconstruction of upper and lower decks. This approval is subject to the following
conditions:
1. All hardcover removals as shown on Page 5 of this resolution shall be completed
prior to the footing inspection for the new construction .
2. Any mature planting to be removed as a result of paving improvements shall be
replanted within street yard.
Page 2 of 6
form 5005 Oisll Orono
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
'}.f')fi10 NO. o , .. ) g .t ,,1
3. · Authorities granted by 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 12, 1994).
4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this
resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically
terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor.
5. 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 City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting
held on the 12th day of July, 1993.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of July,
1993 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of
Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the
City.
JAMIE L BOSMA
NOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA
HENNEPIN COUNTY
My Comm. Expires 12-19-97
Page 3 of 6
Fonn 5005 Disk 0.-
I
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
<!.') "" ,~., ()
NO. ~ ;_:;;; U ;i)
STATE OF :MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this cd_0-+'1 day of ..Ju I..., , 199 ...1_ before me a Notary
Public within and for said county, personally appeared J..a o re O c e D. El-sen o1-Ka ±bee,' 0 e-E; .
Eben husbahJ (L; w;iF-e 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.
8 CAROLE A. HASEMAN
NOTARY ~INNESOTA
HENNEPIN COUNTY
t.rY COMMISSION EXPIRES &-23-1111 ~
STATE OF :MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
<1w1C.1i~
NOTARY PUBLIC
On this _______ day of __________ , 199_ before me a Notary
Public within and for said county, personally appeared ______________ _
___________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed
the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free
act and deed.
NOTARY PUBLIC
Page 4 of 6
form 5005 Di~ Orono
I
·, ;\_}
ttj
Pl
..q
(D
U1
0
Hi
°'
C,t~,~ ...,....,-rt11-
\.1,-.,{_ '7·2•"1":,
~ t--,11JtJt:fOt-lKA..
(1_f.f?U.JG. p,._"14 b')
··-,
I
~o"
--• pt•S'TINC.. ftC.CloC.
f!11"" ,c....r
'l.. ~., ., .. , ...
r: r
,·. • ; .
,, .... l
I,
---':~:'. -
1i ,Ji.
I
I
I
I
-~fvJ \..o._,J;.,._ \.Gvf.L. i
LE.'-'lo:L. HOV1~ """?ITION .
,
• ..
·:;-: t_ ..... :·
-z..G o!.0 1
'
0l7"E::--Pl--AN
-$c::>-L~: 1"• ".?,olo•
.. ,...,'\
r'... :((:)
·,.' ,:~·/;,')
(; ) ..
< ... : .. :::1~~v
1,;o. «i
;>. 9 5 .iii
~f.cf io,-) e.,f! ft ~-:r, ~~ t?!?M-
~ l·,,~""" rO~M 'TO " ...
f41'-'D\1f.O
Pfl.Df'OSf;D
~
~~
~ _(l
A
()
'\,
.),.
1'~
~~· ,., ..
.;".Ht:1"""-1 1..1,-,!£. (r:l.41~f.
~,......,_ 10 l,.wt, yra.:;c;,c;::tt,)
,~,o.o
~~
«__/\) ? ex) ~ 0 ''
N'C,.W
Ncnt ~ "Ai. :SHT• P.'9 a,::-"'l £?" p--.~n& ~!JV. fill t-'15 ~I Ii ,.J D ~
-t-~~~ ll7CN MON\Jt1tNT t=.',(. l-S j;N G
J. I "--1 ..io1z:rn~ rGt..or-a..11 1..1~,,~
f'\d."c"'d C.ov-e.ll l ~ ~ \---e ''llc,v.Q.D
1]11/l --
~
~t)\
(~)
(, .. ,.
:,,•.J'
J -
CITY of ORONO
RESOLlITION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
-c~~ '' "'
NO. -•j ,,·
Exhibit A
Legal Description
That part of Lot 110, Spring Park, lying Northwesterly of
the Southeasterly 90 feet thereof, according to the recorded
plat thereof, and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Also, Lot 101, and the Northwesterly 1/2 of Lot 100, includ
ing all land lying between the Northeast line of Lake Shore
Avenue and Lake Minnetonka and bounded on the Southeast by
the ~southeast line of said Northwesterly 1/2 of Lot 100,
extended to Lake Minnetonka and bounded on the Northwest
by. the Southeast line of Carman Avenue, and including the
vacated portion of Lake Shore Avenue lying adjacent to prein
i ses, all in Spring Park, according to the recorded plat
thereof, and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Page 6 of 6
Legal Description
That part of Lot 110, Spring Park, lying .•:orthwester:y of
the Southeaster 1 y 90 feet thereof, a cording to the recorde(:
pl at thereof,. and situate in Hennepin County, ·~i nnesot a.
Also, Lot 101, and the Northwesterly 1/2 of ~ot 100, includ
ing all land lying between the'Northeast line of Lake Shore
Avenue and Lake Minnetonka and bounded on the Southeast b_,
the Southeast 1ine of said North·.,es:er1y '/2 of Lot iOO.
extenaed to Lake Minneton~a and bounded on the Northwes:
by the Southeast line of Carman Avenue. and inc 1 ud i ng the
vacated portion of Lake Shore Avenue lying adjacent to prem
ises, all in Spring Park, according to the recorded plat
thereof, and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
'lie hereby cert if:; that t"h is is a true and correc
representation of a SJrvey of the bo~naaries o
the land above described and of the location c
all buildings, if any, from or on said ,a.,d.
Dated this 2nd day of December • 1933.
SUNDE LAND SURVEYING, INC.
BY : __ ~--~--,-\.I.._. ,.../2-,--,,,_.,__·-:_-:._-:_P~'":...-::.. __ _
Edward H. Sunde, R.L.S.
Reg No. 2612 /
'· /
/
/
/
/
\,,'
/
/
, .....
.._)
/
/
/
/
(l / \
1.-
CASCO POINT
(BITLJMIN
0LSJ --------
-4PpR
ROAD
Ox le
f:"
D
, R=3t0.0p'
I II : I •••>-f':1 =1°02'45' I
0 • ~=19°54 oo ---,: /:,-:,/ L= 5.66
-R"' z 57 0 CHO B"RG.=N85°31'0'+1
I ---
L_ \,) ,'
/
/
/
/
-,
I
("\
7/
/
/
'?J
/
/
/
/
/
N
II I ,,
' l/
/
/
/
/
/
/
o Denotes Iron Monument Set
• Denotes Iron Monument Found
_, §unde I.and §uS"'·eyins
9001 E. Sioominoton Freeway (35W}
Broom1n910n. MN 55420
1112111,.2,ss
Inc.
,___ __ _...__ ------'.?Dv11.G t) .
f'Dsmve-,1f-&1l,,rst< ~Pc~ TI, w-;, -~c..!!E. -
----4-+-------'~~ -~-------~ _· --
t------'-+--Q# bf--J~ -t.,{)V~r!-~LAT cAJtu__W<:r::~t..0 ~ _
l-----__LL_--~~11/U~-~ __[_,S_ 4_ ~.g~ -~~S'-$> ---,
<;DtsfilSsJON t!F ~t's: Uet. ~G:
-----1
·-~~~•~&Js "'4~ ~------
---++---t ~ ~1-.j ;s_tJ_ 7)~_1/\J W;~ S/0DA~B{.~
--~-.1.L:::"._LvL------------------1
----·-.__ -----------------· _____ ___.
------------------
---------------·-------.
---------------------
-----++--------------
-~-+----------
-----~-----------
-----· -------------~--------!
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
I, Carole Haseman, of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that
a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the matter of #1954, was mailed to the attached list of
property owners.
In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 5th day of August, 1994.
Carole Haseman
""' ' "; ,,' ' ,\\f:'.';"i.:
IUJN .DATE ~5/13193:C:,;.(.' · HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY.INFORMATION SYSTEM.
BATCH 0~3· :u:rt\f:'.·:.,,:}i.
( 38 > 20-:117-23 31 0020.
, PROP ADDR \ 02874 . CASCO POINT RD C.· .· OWNER NAME:< T H .KNAPPER & D. G LYON:
.. TAXPAYER ':\ .. TODD KNAPPER & DEBORAli LYON.
NAME/ADDR; ,::: 2874 CASCO POINT RD.·.
l./ .··• · · 1 H/\r~tl'.,t.,N 55391 .. ·
(._,
,\
·' \ :
"'1t''
1~:
f•!•
'
( •· ............
\.,,
l ,_,
-•
..
38 l'.120-117-23 31 0051
. 02915 · ·'.CASCO POINT RO
. R C·KAIL .. & C L. KAIL ·•
TAXPAYER RICHARO'C KAIL & CAROL KAIL
NAM~/AOOR. 2915 CASCO POINT ROAD . .
WAYZATA MN ·55391
38'/20-111"-23. 31 0054
02879 :h CASCO POINT RD
L D:&'K'E ELSEN ..
, LAWRENCE D & KATHERINE ELSEN
.•. 2879 .CASCO POINT ROAQ .
WAYZATA MN 55391
38•·•:20-111-23 31'•0067
02868 : . CASCO POINT· RO
. CHARLES F NELSON & WIFE·
CHARLES & LUCY NELSON il
2868 CASCO POINT RD .
. WAYZATA MN · 55391 .
PROPERTY OWNERS.LIST
38 20-117-23 31. 0023
00038 'AOORESS UNASSIGNED
T W KNAPPER & D G LYON
TODD KNAPPER & DEBORAH LYON
2874' CASCO POINT RO
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 20-117-23 31 0052.
02905 CASCO POINT RO.
JAMES. KENNETH BONERS.
JAMES K BONER$
2905 CASCO POINT RD
WAYZATA MN' 55391
38 20-117-23 31 0055
02917. ·cASCO POINT RO
H N MAXWELL JR ETAL
HAYNE MAXWELL JR
2917 CASCO POINT RO
WAYZATA MN 55391
·. TOTAL BATCH ·003 00010
38 20-117-23 31 0026
02900 CASCO POINT RO
D SIGAFOOS ETAL
DONALD SIGAFOOS
2900 CASCO PT RO
'WAYZATA MN 55391
38 20-117-23 31 0053
02895 CASCO POINT RO
RICHARD G HELSTROM ETAL
RICHARD G HELSTROM
2895 CASCO POINT RO
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 20-117-23 31 0056''
02871 CASCO POINT RD.
JP & R WOLFE
J PATRICK WOLFE
2871 CASCO POINT RD
~1AYZATA MN . 55391
. I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE
REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT' APPEARS THIS DATE ON tHE RECORDS.
OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, .TO THE BEST
. oF MY KNONLEDGE AND B:~~:~14! (1q~y 1f?t ti1£<.J ·
-\~ '), . . . I , .
., . .,,,_,o ...
\../;~
.·'.~':"'"'.,.,·< .. ::.
. ,
' ._-·
i~
'
•::t--~;;.~;~
¾;-. ; ·d~t-
~fi},
CITY OF ORONO
NO,:ICE
"The Planning Commission will hold -
:>ublic hearings at their monthly meeting on
'Aondar, August 15, 1994 at 7:00 p.m. in the
:::ounci Chambers at 2780 Kelley Parkway on
the maner of reviewing the following land use
applications: ~
1. #1948 Joan M. Harmon has applied
for a conditional use permit that would allow
the continued use of the residential property -
~wned by Frank Kokesh and located at 4100
Watertown Road for the boarding and training
::>f horses. The applicant also seeks approval
of a variance that would allow the commercial
keeping of domestic animals where the code
calls for a non-commercial use. Ms. Harmon
shall operated the horse operation currently
maintained by Frank Kokesh and the
members of his family. The new operation will
be trimmed back considerably from the former
operation.
::,,,:-2. #1949 Sanford Erickson, the owner of
4455 forest lake Landing, seeks approval of
an average lakeshore setback variance for a
proposed four season porch and deck at the
lakeside of the existing residence. -
Affidavit of Publication
State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin.
Bill Holm, being duly sworn on oath, says that he is
an authorized agent and employee of the publisher
of the newspaper known as THE LAKER, Mound,
Minnesota, and has full knowledge of the facts
which are stated below:
3. #1950 Glen Upton of 3685 North . •
-Shore Drive, seeks approval of hardcover A.) The newspaper has compiled With all the
variance with the 0-75' setback area, an • • . . • •
average lakeshore setback and lakeshore requirements Constituting quallflcat1ons as a
~~~~fi!1 ;;~~~~:,sa f~~·x~~, !~~~~ ci~r~~! qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota
andd!~,;1_95 ~K~ndrick B. Melrose, the ow~er \Statute 331 A.02, 331 A.07, and other applicable
of so Cnst1f?n Circle, see~ approval of _a side ,Iaws as amended
. setback variance for a family room add1tton on I ' ~-
the south side of the existing residence. / / ~ 5. #1952 Christine Freeman, the owner . , ~j ·
~~2;~ge~ha~r,f~~eRo:g;,~~!tfg~lie~e~~i~~ ;B.) The printed JLU rl/)jJgfftl 1J}
approval of addition,! hardcover. variances ' //
within the 75-250' setback.
6. #1953 Phillip E. Payne has applied for ---------------'----------hardcover and a side setback variance for a
proposed addition and deck IO the rear of the which is attached was cut from the columns of said
existing residence located at 3475 Livingston
Avenue. ·--newspaper, and was printed and published once
7 #1954 Larry Elsen, the owner of 2870 /
Casco. Point Road, seeks approval of_ a each week for -~--successive weeks:
lakeshore setback variance for privacy fencing
that was installed along the west side lot line ?f
his property -·adjacent• to a ;public I f.
accesstswimmina b~ch...:.:l:he_sectIons .of_ twas irst published Monday,
-privacy-f;nc;i~-9 replaced existing fencing 1/
installed by original owner. / I/ 0 li,
8. #1955 Andrew J. McDermott Ill, the the day of_,~~-"""'"'----19 LL '
-cl~~~~~-~ed -,
for a street setback variance to allow a portion and was thereafter print1 d and published every
of an existing deck to the north side of the
existing residence to be converted to a screen Monday' to and including Monday'
porch. · .
9. #1956 Tom and Chris Smieja, have
applied for rear and street setback variances
for a 2 1/2 story addition to the east side and a
single story addition to the west side of the
existing residence located at 4040 Watertown the ____ day of 19 ·
Road.All persons wishing to be heard will .drti'" ,L-' appear at this meeting. Written comments are
solicited. Plans are available in the City Offices
for review by appointment.
Authorized Agent
City of Orono
By: Planning Commission
Jeanne A. Mabusth
Building & Zoning Administralor >Ubscribed and sworn to me on this
(Published in The Laker and Pioneer Aug. 1, ·
1994)
By:
July 21, 1994
The City Council & Planning Commissioner
City of Orono
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
In response to your letter regarding the fence on our property, we are
requesting the City's consideration of a variance. This fence is
located within our property lines and provides a boundary and privacy
screen between us and Carman Avenue. Carman Avenue is an access road
from Casco Point Road down to the lake. Carman Avenue is presently
being used as a public swim beach, an area for people to park their
cars and bikes, and a place where people can walk down to the lake.
We purchased our home in July of 1987 and have never called the City
regarding any problems concerning this public area. We felt when we
purchased our house the existing fencing, our shed, and the line of
large evergreens along our property line would help substantially
eliminate any possible problems which could result from living next to
a public area. Last year we added to and remodeled our home. In the
process of improving our property, we needed a variance because of
hard cover in the middle zone. The City gave us the variance provided
we tore down our 20 1 x 8'-4" shed located in the southwest corner of
the lot down by the lake. We agreed to remove our shed and have done
so. After removing our shed, the existing fence became exposed and
was in need of major repairs. We will present pictures of both the
new and existing conditions of the fencing and landscaping at the
meeting August 15th. After examining the existing fence, we saw that
the posts were not treated lumber and most of them were rotted out at
the ground. This condition plus many broken horizontal boards created
a safety hazard for both the public side and our side of this fence.
For this reason, we choose to rebuild the fence in its same location
in lieu of slowly replacing vertical posts and horizontal boards.
This safety hazard could cause injury to some person or child or
create a law suit.
Page Two
July 21, 1994
This fence identifies to the public where the access is and keeps the
public and their pets out of our front yard. Sometimes the kids go so
far as to swim on our dock. I guess this isn't the end of the world
but who has the liability if someone gets hurt? People that live in
the immediate area get on and off the lake with their 4 wheel all
terrain vehicles and snowmobiles. We have no problem with this
provided they don't come up on our lawn, bushes, or gardens. This
fence again establishes a boundary. We are aware that the city has
five different signs up now all over the access road regarding many
different rules, but they only work sometimes for some people. This
fence is now half covered on both sides with existing 15+ year old
grape vines. We have planted grape vines this spring to cover the
other half where the shed was. Soon the fence will look entirely like
a hedge and its function will be a trellis.
Since we moved in, we have maintained this access, such as cleaned up
pop and beer cans, glass, garbage, sticks, and seaweed. This year we
formally adopted the beach and have installed many bushes and plants,
increased the grass coverage, cut the grass and trimmed the trees,
plus the normal garbage and seaweed cleanup.
We feel we have been a good neighbor and hope the City will understand
and approve this request for a variance.
Sincerely,
LDE:178
Muruc:ipal Offi:es
Post Office Bax 66 . _ ...
Crystal Bay, M"rm:iesota 55323-0066
DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY
In accordance with M.S . 13.04, Subd. 2, "Rights of subjecc.s of data", we would like co
inform y ou that your request for a permit or license from the City of Orono or any of its
deparnnenc.s ma y require you to furnish certain private or confidential information.
Yo u are notified [hat :
1 . Tne information you furnish will be used co determine your qualification for the
permit or license requested.
,.,
,.,
J .
4 .
5 .
6 .
You ma y refuse co suppl y data, but refusal may require that the City den y the perm it
o r license .
The i.nformacion may be shared with ocher local, state or federal agencie s co the ext e nt
nece s sary co process che permit or license .
If your requested permit or license reqmres Council acnon to approve , some
information may become public.
You ha ve certain righcs under M .S. 13.04 (see following page) to rev iew private data
on yourself.
Your full name is required to process chis application or permit.
·120~, ,VI e_
First Middle Last
ol-8'?9 C,1-sco ~,,..17 f2J.
Address
ff . '-1?/-olP'?l(
V RoAlo ff,\.11 I<-w T /'9-MA/ :S53 I w. 5.:Z..;).. -G,(;;, 8' 3
Cicy Stace Zip Phone
I understand my righcs as stated above .
=Si ~
TELEPHONE-4t.fms7• EU-~O
Sec.13.04 RIGHTS OF SUBJECTS OF DATA
Subdivision 1. Type of data. The rights of individual on whom the data is _stored or
to be stored shall be as set forth in this section. ·-
Subd. 2. Information required to be gi:ven individual. An individual asked to supply
private or confidential data concerning himself shall be informed of: (a) the purpose and
intended use of the requested data within the collecting state agency, political subdivision, or
statewide system; (b) whether he may refuse or is legally required to supply the requested data;
(c) any known consequence arising from his supplying or refusing to supply private or
confidential data; and (d) the identity of other persons or entities authorized by state or federal
law to receive the data. Tbis requirement shall not apply when an individual is asked to supply
investigative data, pursuant to section 13 .82, subdivision 5, to a law enforcement officer.
The commissioner of revenue mav place the notice required under this subdivision in the
individual income tax or orooerrv ta,x refund instructions instead of on those forms.
Subd. 3. Access to data by individual. Upon request to a responsible authority, an
individual shall be informed whether he is the subject of scored data on individuals, and whether
it is classified as public, private or confidential. Upon his further request, an individual who
is the subject of stored private or public data on individuals shall be shown the data without any
charge to him and, if he desires, shall be informed of the content and meaning of that data.
After an individual has been shown the private data and informed of its meaning, the data need
not be disclosed to him for six months thereafter unless a dispute or action pursuant to chis
section is pending or additional data on the individual has been collected or created. The
responsible authority shall provide copies of the private or public data upon request by the
individual subject of the data. The responsible authority may require the requesting person to
pay the actual costs of making, certifying, and compiling the copies.
The responsible authority shall comply immediately, if possible, with any request made
pursuant to this subdivision, or within five days of the date of the request, excluding Saturdays,
Sundays and legal holidays, if immediate compliance is not possible. If he cannot comply with
the request within that ti.me, he shall so inform the individual, and may have an additional five
days within which to comply with the request, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays.
Subd. 4. Procedure when data is not accurate or complete. An individual may
contest the accuracy or completeness of public or private data concerning himself. To exercise
this right, an individual shall notify in writing the responsible authority describing the nature of
the disagreement. The responsible authority shall within 30 days either: (a) correct the data
found to be inaccurate or incomplete and attempt to nocify past recipients of inaccurate or
incomplete data, including recipients named by the individual; or (b) notify the individual that
he believes the data to be correct. Data in dispute shall be disclosed only if the individual's
statement of disagreement is included with the disclosed data.
The determination of the responsible authority may be appealed pursuant to the provisions
of the administrative procedure act relating to contested cases.
11