The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutProject PacketCITY ---- or o---- RONO- GENERAL LAND USE PROPERTY LOCATION •• Site Address CIa9CU PO+j-f P�A4) OF ORM Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Ftj'hA,Vi'fCF 71091U M Please attach legal description to application if not incluy�.. .. 'Lr �C• on required survey. rcIPT-„ypy rQg ------------------ kia_�C c.UL'1 kCl's'b, ---------------------------------------- ----- APPLICANT Phone (home) L1i 1-7 S-(fU Name C- a- to ` I`JJ�..+-�•+-�- Phone (work) f(i(.�400 Address ?1i 4 Cul-,Ce) P-- P City zip S'S 35 � --------------------------------------------------------------------------- aNNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Address Phone City Zip Date Prcquired M ate" I ( 7 7 (O (month/year) ---_-I (do) ---ope- not)_also own the adjacent parcels of land. _____ ______________________________ PEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After -the -Feet Fee - Double Curren.`_ Application Fee $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application $125.00 Residential accessory Use $150.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 Guest Rouse/Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use _ $200.00 Land Alteration _ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTC APPLICATIONS $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $175.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation with Subdivision $250.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee scheduis) $100.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property MCResidential e DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map. <. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (110 K 17. OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: Date APPLICANT'S SIGRIATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supilied is true and correct to the be of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature ) _ rG _ Date 6-- 2 `7d OWNERS SIGNAY9RE The owner her by acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date 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 ea-,. month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building i Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) " After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) ----------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 1I i.,( Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)." ='>� J �l rITYOF O OFFICE Attach legal description to application if not included on MI T required survey. 014 -------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (hose) 471-'7'. V6 Name! Phone (work) '/71-.-OY6n Address:. G S 1 � - City:JL—' ,r.� , fn zip e S� ------------ _-----�'----__ anumE (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address: City: Sips Date Property Acquired G 0kr 1i 7S (month/year) I (do) no also own the adjacent parcels of land. "-------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRNEENT ass of PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $it0,0' Describe request in detail: Apt : W L �pnPrs+ _ _________________________________ _ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width A Hardcover Setback Variances 1 Front side _ Rear) Other HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: Fp, H t— t,.,rAy is nca FCKa 4,r� Karr --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code RegLi rements:9t2L' uF wr or ntko ,_ E'. L* 4 w Rx;c ------- --I- -------- ----------------- ------------------------------------------------------ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form fL 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 15C' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 1. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. 6. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views. 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. B. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (110 K 17. OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUEM7TTED. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application in not complete if the above Certification by Clerical Department that Variance Application is cmplete. Initialed by Clerical Staff: Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct tto) the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature-, h-r-�X tial d..-.�—Date /-46' OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga- tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 2S days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building c Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY In accordance with M.S. 15.165, "Rights of subjects of data", we would like to inform you that your request for a permit or license from the City of Orono or any of its departments may require you to furnish certain private or confidential inform- ati, . You are notified that: 1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. 3. The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permit or license. 4. If your requested permit or license regires council action to approve, some information may become public. 5. You have tertian rights under M.S. 15.165 to review private data on yourself. 6. Your full name, and date of birth are required to process this application or permit. F �at Mia a Last Wa4A Less Date of birth luoub not apply to building/general permits) Phone I upderstand my rights as stated above. X i t` S ignature sls.o� RIGErn or SUBJECTS or DATA Subdivision L Type of date. The rights of individuals on whom the data is stored or to be stored shall be as set forth in this section. Subd. 2. Information required to be given individual. Anindividual asked to supply private or confidential data concerning himself shall be informed of: (a) the purpose and intended use of the requested data within the collecting state agency, political subdivision, or statewide system; (b) whether he may refuse or is legally required to supply the requested data; (c) any known consequence arising from his supplying or refusing to supply private or confidential data; and (d) the identity of other persons or entities authorized by state or federal law to receive the data. This. requirement shall not apply when an individual is asked to supply investigative data, pursuant to section 13.92, subdivision S, to a law enforcement officer. The "mmissioner of revenue may place the notice reouired under this Subd. 3. Acevs to data by individual. Upon request to a responsible authority, an Individual shall be informed whether t e is the subject of stored data on individuals, and whether It is m,ecified as public, private or confidential. Upon his further request, in individual who is the subject of stored private or public data on individuals stall be shown the data without any charge to him and, if he desires, shall Se informed of the content and meaning of that data. After an individual has been shown the private data and informed of Its meaning, the data need not be disclosed to him for six months thereafter unless a dispute or action pursuant to this section is pending or additional data on the individual has been collected or created. The responsible authority shall provide copies of the private or public data upon request by the individual subject of the data. The responsible authority may require the requesting person to pay the actual costs of making, certifying, and compiling the copies The responsible authority shall comply immediately, if possible, with any request made pursuant to this subdivision, or within five days of the date of the request, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, if immediate compliance is not possible. if he cannot comply with the request within that time, he shall so inform the individual, and may have an additional five days within which to comply with the request, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays. Sub& 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) eorr act the data found to be inaccurate or incomplete and attempt to notify past recipients of inaccurate or incomplete data, including recipients named by the individual; or (b) notify the individual that he believes the data to be correct. Data in dispute shall be disclosed only if the iidMdual's statement of disagreement is included with the disclosed data. The determination of the responsible i Sort:y may be appealed p"^s•uant to the provisions of the administrative procedure act relating to contested cases. Cnv Oryeep�p. rypiiCE W:��M �N�.M1 _ua line >uCIK eaNn ban A Cowan Iue.ei �auh ]0 IYW. m IM mY1N of r.rw+q XW IpYp�_ qW lySe ynE r EP 1 Yp 0.yNr.a 155 i.Ne � �� a .tayrW W W prriryl lO Xe ynlrorw 41rcMU w4 no z Yo fye r ]o-., YrOn a 1.ee Pr. OIM. YMr r� rx.rWc.Ie n yelm 1 NIM�1'Y�uCN..MN WIItle.rY ] MO 1.e� Ylgb. a IMO ro�m.m�ci r~..sora lo- rNrre .r W�icn ^YR OWI OI ~dY1W YrYCN. nWi. . Ile 1.ez YrE hw. a ]tee 4mn eM bYY . NOcmN rNWiu wlln IM )e ie 3b rtp.cEYu Ie n e .Seim is SW R rryyrrYa YrW IN. a ra.n Sayre r�rr oa.a.. a zees Cs. n wwry rwcn tiare.N •rWr rev r�ae .ee1m fo W e.sNp r e W f.w Rr LgyM. a yye new+Slr.rr Yr.. NO<enr ean.r.r. .o. �ne.no-e r.feee .rWwe. la . o-o � +mic. ilia ..asap +. oN.rr• ..,e la elnwwypeN NM ..wN Ce�Wr.ra Yec+y mwe e. NYrenlrnnl n.w n. Uy c� +....e Yr,ea b+ratize.aYe..W lnlar - mrra. r.. l.M WY eryN rep e leap Affidavit of Publication State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin. Bill Holm. being duly swom, on oath Says that he is an authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as THE LAKER. Mound. Min- nesota. and has lull knowledge of the facts which are stated below'. A.i The newspaper has compiled with all the require- ments constituting qualifications as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. B.I The preded Y 4- 12C.� [ [ -- which is attached was cut from the columns of seal newspaper. and was printed and published once each week for / successive weeks. It was first published Monday, the `'..„Y" day It 7t19 and was thereafter printed and PublKhOd every Monday, to and including Monday. the _ day of 19_; Authorized Agent Subscribed and sworn to me on this day of . 19_. By. ?Q-LI-C1c Notary Public M!M L lLl[ll &,, epOp rlbL.a ' 4� lee M Hit" 1 t I LO •aeD tm cW 9110 ore ey aNnwar uNa Iw cafoi+ W apace ee'rice ae 1211Wce a .n"rre Yweeeey rr In eeaem 15 fa 80 oft rra ,31 iW .leE serge fw .ewe mm 20 n Each adiIINW WLAEan'e aMM $3 3e W oft .r4n To: Mayor Grabek 1 Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building 6 Zoning Administrator Date: February 13, 1990 Subject: 41493 Chuck Downey, 2665 Casco Point Road - Variance - Public Hearing Pertinent ordinance - Sectior. 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Hardcover. 0-75' Setback Area - 4,500 s.f. Existing Hardcover - 550 s.f. or 12.2% (no change proposed) 75-250' Setback Area - 8,.5n s.f. Allowed - 2,087.5 s.f. or 25% Existing per Applicant's Site Plan - 3,760 s.f. or 45% Existing per Staff s Inspection = 4,363 s.f. or 52t•1 Proposed - 4,393 s.f. or 52.6!•2 4 5-,24 •1 House - 1-,914 s.f. 1982 Carage Addition 624 s.f. Driveway/Parking Area 1,030 s.f. Patio - 580 s.f. Sidewalks - 548 s.f. Retaining Wall - 126 s.f. •2 114 s.f. of entry/porch structure 84 s.f. existing non-structural hardcover 30 s.f. net increase of hardcover List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Council Minutes 10/13/62 Exhibit E - Survey/Site Plan Submitted by Applicant Exhibit F - Front/Street Elevation Exhibit G - Foundation Plan Exhibit H - 1st Floor Plan Exhibit I - Entry Section Exhibit J - Revised Site Plan - Staff In 1982 the applicant received approval of setback and hardcover variances for an expansion of the existing detached garage. The survey submitted for that review reflects hardcover at 45l. Applicant was not required to remove existing excesses of hardcover for the variance approval. in reviewing the 1982 survey, the second story deck is not shown. Staff has no record of a permit being issued since 1982 for the second story deck. Applicant should be asked to advise of the status of the deck. Zoning File 11493 February 13, 1990 Page 2 of 2 Review of Current Application - The current application involves an entry addition to the street side of the existing structure requiring no setback variances. The entry addition consists of a 7111'x6' porch with roof and an enclosed entry room 11'x6'(review Exhibit H). The entry structure will be placed over 84 s.f. of existing non- structural hardcover for a net increase of 30 s.f, of hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. ' Staff has placed existing hardcover at 4,363 s.f. or 52%. There have been expansions of the paved gravel area adjacent to the street in addition to a sidewalk from parking area to sidewalk adjacent to house. Please review hardship cited by applicant on face of application. Applicant notes of need to provide an entry as a shield/buffer from outside weather upon direct entry to kitchen. Options of Action Denial. If denied, please refer to Section 10.08 for the necessary findings of fact; or Approval. if approved, a hardcover variance increase of 30 s.f. or .6% would be required. The Planning Commission may consider conditioning approval on removal of excesses of hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. The Planning Commission should be prepared to provide guidelines for applicant as to a reasonable percentage of hardcover to be removed. 19) LA NCDO c z7) IQ (70) (N) (rPC' 1 I. - a is ti a rOIO//l0/fOIO/G., E4x IO A)iW ns h R lt) 20) CQ (7)t . ` I. nxXL n • •Tun ` 9�.• LAM;D7: f0 ' i a c��mpQ D'Ds.(341 (32) 4t t35) �3\ LA RANI DATE 01/26/10 BATCH OW M 20-117-23 23 0001 PROP ADM DOOM ADDRESS LHASSIIiED ON ER NAME ►EVERLY SWRLING TAXPAYER BEVERLY STERLING NA E/ADDN 2Ei52 M LAKE Of ISLES WHY • WLS NY 55405 M 20-117-23 23 0004 RRCP ROM 02697 CASCO POINT RD ORDER NNE A A C BANE TAXPAYER • LNNEWE ARE • NNE/AWN 2697 CASCO POINT AD MAYZATA MN 55591 M 20-117-23 23 0021 PROP AMR 02N5 CASCO POINT RD OMEN NAME DEME" C DOEEY A MIFE TAXPAYER EMMETT C DOW EY MAME/ADDR 2665 CASCO POINT ND WAYZATA MH 55391 M 20-1CASCO 24 0002 PNNE AM 02460 9 CASCO POINT RD OIER ERW V t O WLLEN TAXPAYER VERN26" CASCO J OUMIN NAW/ADM 2660 MN POINT RO LMYLTI Ifl MTfI • M 20-117-23 24 0020 •PROP ADM O2TM CA POINT RD OWNER NNE DALE A CHRISTENSEN A WIFE TAXPAYER DALE A CMRISTIMEN NNE/ADM 27M CASCO POINT RO • MAYZATA MI SS391 •M 20-217-23 24 0030 PNOP ADM 02N5 CASCO POINT RD INDEED NAME N J MEEW A A E MEEIE TAXPAYER NW GREEIE A ALAM G EEW • NNE/ADOR 2W5 CASCO POINT ROAD MAYZATA MX S5391 HENEPIN CO PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY MfERS LIST M 20-I17-23 23 0002 02691 CASCO POINT RD ROBERT R N ETAL ROBERT R MINT 2691 CASCO PT RD MAYZATA M 55391 REPORT W. PI435601 PAGE 12 38 20-117-23 23 0003 02695 CASCO POINT RD 03PLEE OE F APR LEE Z695 CASCO POINT PO MAYZATA MN 55391 M 20-112-23 23 0005 38 20-117-23 23 0020 02715 CASCO POINT RD 02607 CASCO POINT 9D T A 0 ERWIN TYRONE A BWEY t MILA MEN TERRY A t DOROTHY L ERMIN TYRONE A t MILA BOGEY 2715 CASCO POINT RD 2677 CASCO PT RD MAYZATA AEI 55391 WAYZATA IN SS392 38 20-112-23 23 0022 38 20-117-23 24 0001 02659 CASCO POINT RD 02684 CASCO POINT RD S S STAIOA A I S STANDA TMEODME C DANTIS S S STAMA A I S STANOA DAVID RWILE 2659 CASCO POINT RD 26M CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA NV SS391 MAYZATA MI 55391 38 20-117-23 24 0003 38 20-112-23 26 0004 026S4 CASCO POINT RD 02486 CASCO POINT RD TMEODORE C DANTIS TMEMME C DANTIS DAVID RWLLE 'AVID RWILE 26" CASCO PT RD SO 26M CASCO POINT RD MAYZATA AEI 55391 MAYZATA fN SS391 M 20-I17-23 24 NIL 02730 CASCO POINT RD C M A R J PALMER CORTIS H A BARBARA J PALMER 2710 CASCO POINT RD MAYZATA MY SS39L 38 20-I17-23 24 OD31 02635 CASCO POINT RD MARILYN B THOME ET AL MARILM B TMORE 2635 CASCO POINT RD MAYZATA MI 55391 38 20-112-23 24 0029 02649 CASCO POINT RD J A J SCHERVEN JON SCHERVEN 2649 CASCO POINT PO BOX 120 NAVARRE IN SS392 M 20-117-23 24 0032 02623 CASCO POINT RO J 6 N STINSOI JAWS L 6 MA0MI L STINSOI 2623 CASCO POINT RD MAYZATA MI 55391 • RIM DATE WIG/" • BATCH 009 ,yr 38 20-117-23 26 0035 DROD AIDA 02617 CASCO POINT RD • OHNIR NAME D L HARQ AROT/J M HAROIURDT TAXPAYER GUY L A JOAN M HARGUAIDT NAME/AMA 2617 CASCO POINT RD • MEYZATA NI SS391 •AS 20-117-23 24 00N PROP ADM 02692 ETHEL AVE OEER HAND DOOUTHY L NEARNS TAXPAYER DOROTHY L REARM • HAE/AMR 2691 ETHEL AVE HAYZATA NI 55391 • • • • • • • • • • • HENEPIN COLAITY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONERS LIST IS 20-11743 26 DOM 02618 CASCO POINT AD JOYCE A THEDT JOYCE A TNEOT 261R CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA HMI M391 TOTAL DAMN 009 00022 REPORT W. P143%01 PAGE 13 M 20-117-23 26 0039 02698 CASCO POINT RD J H F R J ESSEH JEFFREY A RARRARA ESSEN 26" CASCG PT RD HAYZATA NI 0391 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION 6 IT APPEARS THIS DATE NI THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUITY OEPIATHFi:- OF PROPERTY TUUTION, TO THE REST OF NT R141LEDGE AND RELIEF. DATE yL BY RIN DATE 02/12/90 • BATCH 005 3S 20-117-23 23 0001 • PROP MDR 02603 CASCO POINT RD DEER NNE BEVERLY SMERLING TAXPAYER BEVERLY SMERLING NAME/AMR 2552 M LANE OR ISLES PAW • MPLS MN 55405 • IN 20-112-23 23 00" PRW AMR 02697 CASCO POINT RD OVER NAME A A C RAW TA.WAYER A LAMENCE RAMS • MWE/AOOR 2697 CASCO POINT RD MAYZATA RN 55391 • IS 20-117-23 23 0021 RAW 10M 02665 CASCO POINT RD DEER NAME DENETT C MONEY A RIFE • TAXPAYER BENETT C OPNEY NAME/ADM 2665 CASCO POINT RD MIAYZATA Mil 55391 • M 20-I17-23 24 OOOI PROP MOR 02640 CASCO POINT PO • PEER NNE V A G MLLER TAPAVER VERMIN J BOLLER HUE/AM 2660 CASCO POINT RD MAYZATA MN M311 • M 20-117-23 24 0021 • MW AM 02710 CASCO POINT PO PEER NAME C H A 0 J PALMER TAXPAYER CUMTIS M A BARBARA J PALMER NAME/AOM 2210 CASCO POINT RD • WYZATA MH 55391 • IN 20-112-23 24 0030 PROP ADM 02N5 CASCO POINT RD ONER NNE N J MEW A A K GREEME TAXPAYER NORMA GREENE A ALM GREENS • NNE/AOM 2645 CASCO POINT ROAD WYZATA MH SS391 0.9 • HENIEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT M. P14SWI PROPERTY OH ERS LIST PAGE 14 • 38 20-117-23 23 0002 SO 20-112-23 23 0003 02691 CASCO POINT RD 02695 CASCO POINT RD • ROHERT R HtMT ETAL D E P LEE ROBERT . 9ON7 D E F A P R LEE 2691 CASCO PT RD 2695 CASCO POINT RD HAY2ATA M 55311 MIAYZATA ME9 55391 • 38 20-112-25 23 0005 M 20-117-23 23 0020 • 02715 CASCO POINT RD 02677 C S O POINT RD T A D ERNIN "RO2E A IMCEY A MILA BOGEY TERRY A A DOROTHY L EARTH TYROS A A MTILA MICEY 2915 CASCO POINT RD 2677 CASCO PT RD • NAYZATA IN 55391 MAYZATA AM 55391 • 30 20-117-23 23 0022 30 20-117-23 24 0001 02659 CASCO POINT RD 02604 CASCO POINT RD S S STAMA A I S STANDA THEODORE C DNRIS S S STANDI A I S :rANDA DAM RIMtLE • 2659 CASCO POINT RD 2666 CASCO POINT AD HAYZATA MN SS391 HAYaTA MN SS391 n / J • SO 20-112-23 24 0005 TO 20-112-23 24 0004 026 CASCO POINT RD 02684 CASCO POINT RD THE DOME C MANTIS THEODORE C CANTIS • DAVID RIRA(LE DAVID RINRLE 2684 CA%O PT NO SO 26" C154:0 POINT RD HAYZATA Mil 55391 MAYUTA MH 55391 • 30 20-117-23 24 0022 IS 20-112-23 24 0021 02700 CASCO POINT RD 02449 CASCO POINT RD • 0 P RUESING A L R RtFWHO J A J WHERVEN DANIEL MISSING/LIMA RI/NING JON SCHERVEN 2700 CASED POINT RD 2649 CASCD POINT a NAYZATA HN 55391 BOX 120 • NAVARRE MN 55592 30 20-117-23 24 0031 3B 20-112-23 24 W32 • O263S CASCO POINT RD 02623 CLSCO POINT AO MARILYN R TPONE ET AL J A N STINSON MARILYN B THORNE JAMES L A MADR[ L STIMEPR 2635 CASCO POINT RD 2623 CA ..0 POINT M • NAYZATA MH 55391 MAYZATA MN M391 • •,.11 RIN DOTE O7/12/90 • BATCH 005 IS 20-117-23 2. 003E • PROP AM 02617 CASCO POINT RD GOER NAME D L MARWARDT/J M MAROIAROT TUPAYER GERM L E JOW M MARQARDT NAME/ADCA 2617 CASCO POINT RD • IAYUTA MH M391 • PROP ADGR OVER NAME TWAYER TOTAL BATCM OOS SOON • MAIE/AOOI • • • • • • • • HENN:PIN COIMY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONERS LIST IS 20-117-23 26 W39 02A CASCO POINT RD J N B D J ESSEN JEFFREY E BARBARA ESSEN 26" CASCO PT 00 MAYLETA HH M391 REPORT W. P1635601 PACE IS ID 20-117-23 24 OOK 02491 ETHEL AVE OOROTHY L REAR6 DOROTHY L REARMS 2491 ETHEL AVE HAYUTA NI M391 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCIUATE AND TOW REPRESENTATION Of INFORMATION AS IT ARREARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS W THE HENEPIN C01N9Y OEPARTHENT OF PROPERTY TARATIOM. TO THE MST 'If NT KMDLEDOE AND BELIEF./� DATE !/f <-70 ❑'I.A Iv MIA:I ING of TIIF. ORONO CMTN: tI.. OCTOBER 11, 14e2 D Page VooWARtANCE 260;S Casco roint Road 0707 -harles Downey BID AWARD e2-1 c 87-2 RESOLUTION 11424 Nadland .Associates 82-1 2onin7 Administrator Mabusth reviewed with the City Council the reque'.of Charles Downey, 2465 Canco Point Road, for .. variance to construct a gara )a. mr. Downey was present to discuss his varlanes applicntinn. Discussion ineluded hardcover .ed tnrs.r2un•1 in addition to the plaeemast of thr, yara7•�. A,-.tin•1 M7yar Butler raved, Burr se-onLed, to ipprove Charles Downey`s, 266S Casco Point Road, harlt,v^r and street, front, and side setback variances to permit the construction of a new d••ta-hel larago as follows: 1. ii,rdcover variance for additional hardcover of it or 143 sq. ft. A it -to setback of 1.00. r. Frant!street setback to be determined by ntaf f. Building inspector has confirmed a aetback of 1- from ask tree. Mallon. Ayes (1) - Nays (Bj. city Ng roper Cook reviewed with the City Council the bil tahulstions for the 52-1 and 12-2 lmpravement projects stating that Nedlond A-Roc:ates were the low bidder tot tha "Nor and :er project and that VAllay Paving is tha low Liddor for the street project. Engineer Cook also explained the necessity Of an Addendum 61 for the sewer and water Project. qurr novel. Frahm seconded, to adopt Resolution 11424. A Resolution Accepting Bid And Ordering Improvement. Navarre Sawr a rater Improvements Project 92-1. to Nodland Associates, to Include ► iden•.fum it. with the optionof the Administrator '., not award tte contract It he deems It not ..dvinable. motion. Ayes (1) - Nays (AI. TO: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson PROM: Jeaanne A. Mabusth, Building i Zoning Administrator DATE: March 13, 1990 Subject: 41493 Chuck Downey, 2665 Casco Point Road - Variance - Continuation of Public Hearing Partinent Ordinance - Section 10,22, Subdivision 2 - Hardcover 75' Setback Area - 4,500 s.f. Existing Hardcover - 550 s.f. or 12.2% (no change proposed) 75-250' Setback Area - 8,350 s.f. Allowed - 2,087.5 r.f. or 25% Existing per applicant's original site plan for 1982 = 3,760 s.f. or 45% Original staff estimate- 4,363 s.f. or 52% Amended staff estimate - 4,516 s.f. or 544+ Hardcover proposed for removal by applicant - 634 s.f. (refer to Exhibit L) Required hardcover removal to meet Planning Commission's Directive must be 756 s.f. if 45% hardcover is maintained + In a reinspection of proposed areas of existing hardcover to be removed, staff noted the following additional hardcover not included in a original estimates (review Exhibit L): A - Landscape are, with underlying plastic B - Overlapping deck, structure, stairs and landscape area with underlying plastic Additional Eshibits: K - Planning Commission Action Notice L - Revised Site Plan Zoning Pile 41493 March 13, 1990 Page Two of Two In order to meet the directives of the Planning Commission to hold hardcover at 45% within the 75-250' setback zone, the applicant must remove an additional 122 s.f, of existing hardcover. The original plans submitted by applicant (Exhibit L) showed 634 s.f. of existing hardcover to be removed and delineated with batch markings. Staff will meet with the applicant prior to the meeting in order to determine the additional area of existing hardcover to be removed so that the Planning Commission can formally act on the amended variance application. If applicant questions staff's estimate, applicant has the option of having his own surveyor complete an update of existing improvements on the property. If the applicant agrees to maintain hardcover at 45% and presents an amended plan prior to the meeting for staff's review, Planning Commission may proceed with formal action. This approval must be subject to the conditions that all existing hardcover scheduled for removal must be completed at the time the Building Inspector makes the footing inspection for new construction. ZONING FILE RO.1493 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 3/21/90 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Chuck Downey COPIES TO: 2665 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TYPE OF APPLICATION: variances --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 3/19/90 VOTE: 3 For 1 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to staff verifying final hardcover at 45%. I would recommend that prior to the Council meeting that we meet to confirm the actual removals and prepare the necessary site plan for Council's review and action. I will be out of town through April 2, 1990, and suggest you call me on that date to set up a meeting. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of revised site plan. Deadline for the April 9, 1990 meeting is April 2, 1990 or April 13, 1990 for the April 23, 1990 meeting. To: Mayor Grabek a Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Prom: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building 6 Zoning Administrator Date: April 5, 1990 Subject: 41493 Chuck Downey, 2665 Casco Point Road - Variance - Resolution Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Hardcover. 0-75' Setback Area = 4,500 s.f. Existing Hardcover: Boat House - 273 s.f. walks, etc. 277 s.f. TOTAL HARDCOVER = 550 s.f. or 12.2% 75-250' Setback Area - 8,350 s.f. Allowed - 2,087.5 s.f. or 25% Existing per Applicant's Original Site Plan for 1982 = 3,760 s.f. or 45% Existing per Staff Estimate = 4,516 s.f. or 54% House = 1,455 s.f. Garage = 624 s.f. Driveway = 1,030 s.f. Patio = 580 s.f. Sidewalks = 548 s.f. Retaining Walls = 126 s.f. Landscaping, Stairs, Retaining walla - 153 s.f. Proposed Hardcover = 4,546 s.f.• or 54% • 114 s.f. of entry/porch structure 84 s.f. existing non-structural hardcover 30 s.f. net increase of hardcover List of exhibit• Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - PropertN Owners List Exhibit D - Council Minutes 10/13/82 Exhibit E - Su:vey%Site Flan Submitted by Applicant Exhibit F - Front/Street Elevation Exhibit G - Found,tion Plan Exhibit H - lat Floor Plan Exhibit I - Entry Section Exhibit J - Revised Site Plan - Staff Exhibit R - Planning Commission potion Notice Exhibit L - Aranded Plan for Council 4/9/90 Meeting Zoning File 01493 April 5, 1990 Page 2 of 2 Review of Application - The applicant proposes construction of an entry addition to the street side of the existing structure requiring no setback variance. The entry addition consists of a 7'11'x6' porch with roof and an enclosed entry room ll'x6' (review Exhibit B). The entry structure will be placed over 84 s.f. of existing non- structural hardcover for a net increase of 30 s.f. of hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. Staff has placed existing hardcover at 4,516 s.f. or 54%. Excessive amounts of hardcover exist within the setback area. Any additional improvement requires tardcover variance approvals. In 1982 the applicant received approval of setback and hardcover variances for an expansion of the existing detached garage. A survey submitted for that review reflects hardcover at 45%. Applicant was not required to remove existing excesses of hardcover for the variance approval. In reviewing the 1982 survey, the second story deck is not shown. Staff has no record of a permit being issued since 1982 for the second story deck. There have been expansions of the paved gravel area adjacent to the street in addition to a sidewalk from parking area to side- walk adjacent to house. Please review ha:-dship cited by applicant on face of application. Applicant notes of need to provide an entr- as a shield/buffer from outside weather upon direct entry to kitchen. This application was reviewed by the Planning commission at their February and March meetings. At the March meeting, the applicant was advised that approval of the new structural addition was based on overall hardcover within the 75-250' set- back area being maintained at the original 45% approved in 1982. The amended plan (Exhibit L) submitted for the Council's review sets forth areas of hardcover improvements scheduled for removal. The applicant has reviewed the plan and agrees to the amended proposal. Based on the Planning Commission's approval recrmmendation, staff has prepared the necessary resolution for formal Council action. TC: W. R. hensun, Cat.y Admi:..str. ct.r PROM; Jeanne Xabusth, Zoning Aimi:.:str .• DATE: October S. 1982 SUHJECTt 87 - Char I [)own, --,- Zoning; District - LP -IC Application - multiple varianca,s al side setback: required - 10- existinq - I.C' proposed - 1.8- variance - 8,2' of 62, tl street sutLdck: rut'uired - 10- existing - 20.8' proposed - 20.8- variance - 9.2- or it, c1 Hardcover variance: 75' - l50' setback ore., . 815,1 a,• allowed - 2889 at or l,, existing - J500 at or 42- proposed additional hardcover ,: 1 total hardcover - 17u0 of ur 45- Please review the enclosed survey submits,-d with a;.pl u•atton. Downey plans to construct an entirely new j.,raov, nut .,JJ ,r, .additional stall to the existing? garage. Staff has advls.•,t .acq.ia.•me th,t we will require a minimum 1' side setback for the garaaa. t::..JJit%-i. he, was advised that the gara,le could be located as :les. as to- ..t, Casco Point Road right of way it doors were to iaev .,way 'run :roe.-. road and a turnaround provided on the Ulta. The exixtitnt orae.'I ar.•a r-uld be used as Met that turnaround. Downey contends this wuulJ destroy his backyard as hat' plans to and gravel area if the aecond sta11 and additional drivaiwayaid ,^ installed. Downcy contends that thla is the Only location for the gairs".,te, IaMtlr♦ nelghhor's continued privacy and View of the lake. Staff cannot sea 1Ov - moving the ganaqu 10' closer to the real will interfere with nelghbor's privacy or block view of Carman* pay. .f the oar..a.- doors were to face onto the street, the gravel area would h.• ne.J,d ta, ,rovrde for a turn- arounds although staff does not feel '0' wtll ..n,vadv the required depth for adequate turnaround. The Planninq Ctsemtssio- ••oted unanimously to recuem.end approval of the application as propoaed. Staff again must recommend relocrtlnq the garage to- off read riqht of way with doors facing away from road allow for turt..:round on site. The garage may La• located 1' from side property I,ne. Control No. 707 CITY of OROIN'O Yr INh. ILi. Y.1',Y.W Kw. w....�.. •�.�..w...w .M6n TO: Charles Downey 2665 Casco Point Road Wayzata, Mn. 5519' Copies to: Meeting Date 10-11-a2 bties Date x Variance _ Conditional Use Permit Subdivision, Prelimdnary Subdivision, Final -rev+►rrrrsrsrkwrto rrieeo-rrsrira-rrx,u,s+-:�rrr'...i-rarr:.►rr►r►r►ar►rr*A A I A A Aaerese.r• COUNCIL ACTION Vote: 1 For _ Against Abstsn.ton NOTION to approve the hardcover a.id str,et/front and Side setback variances application to purmat the construction of a nvw detached garage as fo)lowsn I a) hardcover variance for additional hardcover of 1t or 260af. b) a side setback of 1.8' e1 front/strout setback to be dutetained by staff -building Inspector ham confirmed a setback I' from oak true. Ple ALe call of you have any questions. �eerr+►ese+et►a►►rrrr►r+rr+r*,I,vrtrr,�+�,trr+-r,t DEADLINE DATE for submittal of new information (application sry be eatsidrred for•-z11y withdrawn if information or explanation is not prwidad,) x for Work Permit for work to begin for wont to be'" _ application completed � ,4 WORK PERMITS ARE REQUIRED - contact Building Inspector before begiMlflg work. 1 x VARIANCE APPROVAL is limited to the extent shown on approved plans. " Do not change plans. variance authority expires one year after spproval. -); _ CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL expires upon change of ownership or use. e or on deadline date specified above, PRELIN.HART SUBDIVISION APPROVAL - Applicant mot provide all inferrtlan it, _ and/or improvesrnts required for final approval. Contact Zoning Administrator. ' FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL - Applicant must have drawings, resolution and all athar regrlred documents recorded, with certification of such recording returned .O the City by deadline date. Certified copies of official City Counctl Minutes may be o a conta^ttng the City Clerk. Allow at least three wake from mating date. Control No. 707 CITY of ORON'O rr r N4. R. "Oo,"" N,, wr....w':.r_1. m....,.r' "f_ TO: Charles Downey 2665 Casco Point Road Wayzata, Mn. 553d1 Copies to: Meeting Date 10-13-62 Notice Date - - X ,a !ante _ Jitional We Permit Subdivision, Preliminary Subdivision, Final ya :A+Ai'AMi}i iAti n.rtAv►#ii►#► n.wwa.: rlrY COUNCIL ACTION Vote: 3 For _ Against _ Ab•ten.lon MOTI04 to aaorove the hardcover a.,d et, t/front and side setback variant,.. ulplication to purnit the,• construction of a nvv dutachad garage sa folloa__I a) hardcover variance for additional h.,rdc;vor of 3% or 260sf. b) a aide setback of 1.8' c) [rent/stroot setback to be Auturr..ined by staff -building Inspector has confirmed a setback 3' from oak true. Plea:.e call if you have any questions. !1f�f+LirM►►fMwr.�a`aMfAaafswsafttrr#4rn rairtt+r►wsw+Me ► ,*►f DEADLINE DATE for submittal of new information (application my be omvtdserir fo-al:y withdrawn if tnforration or explanation L not provided). x for 'fork Pcratt _ for work to begin . for work CO,bE} application eo+leted , WORK PERMITS ARE REQLRRED - contact tuilding tnopecto. before beginning work. x VAR 1NCE APPROVAL is limited to the extent etw.a ,,n i proved pies. Do rot Change plans. variance autnority expires ono year after approval. CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL expires upon change of ownership or use, or on deadline data speetfied above. PRELIKIMR7 SUBDIVISTO4 Al'➢7t41VJII1. - Applicant must provide all information and/or improvements requirea for final approval. Contscc Zoning Admintstrato-. FINAL SUbDiVIST04 APPROVAL - Applicant must have drawings, resolution and all other ragetred documents recorded, with eartiftatiaOn of such recording returned .n the City by deadline date. Certified copies of official Cfty aunctl Minutes may be obcalnod by contacting the City Clerk. Allow at least three %,asks from ameting date. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, M"! 55323 473-7357 ---------- .._..__..-----------------. TO: Mr. S Mrs. Chuck Downey 2665 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance --------------------- APPLICATION NO. 1493 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: 4/17/90 ---------------------------------- COPIES: DATE OF METING: 4/9/90 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: r, table the variance portion of your application and per you: comments at that meeting, to submit a conditional use permit/variance application for proposed land alterations within the lakeshore of you: property. Per Council's direction, fees for the second phase of the application would be determined from the original filing fees of variance application for 41493. The fees would be as follows: Conditional Use Permit Application . . . . $200.6' Variance for Work Done within 75' of Lakeshore . . . 50.00 (add on to base variance paid in Applicatior 41493) TOTAr $250.00 Staff has enclosed an application for Conditional Use Permit tha* includes the schedule for upcoming meetings and deadlines for filing. The following information will be needed to complete a comphrensive rev' w o: your improvement project: 1. Updated survey showing ail harryover improvements on the propert... to include such improvements as gravel parking area, landscape area; with underlaying plastic, retaining walls, etc. Please have your surveyor contact the City if he has any questions. At the April 9. 1990 Counc+.l meeting, the City Engineer confirmed that the parkinc area at t, ^.ast/street side of your property can not function as e turn around, and appears to serve only or additional parking area. Your survey must show the proposed entry improvement. If retainine walls are to be installed as a result of land alterations the retaining walls should also be shown on the survey and included ir hardcover calculations. As for the Conditional Use Permit phase of the application the following should be submitted: 1. Topog, phi- work showing proposed and a%isting elevations. 2. A section of a,:v retaining walls to be installed showinc structural support memoers (tie in, anchoring, etc.). 3. You claimed there was serious impact upon your property by certain improvements to the Rolzer property. Please provide specific inform%tion regaLding this claim. To- Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building 6 Zoning Administrator Date: August 15, 1990 Subject: Chuck Downey, 2665 Casco Point Road - A) 41493 Variances - Referred back to Planning Commission by Council for Further Review B) 41570 Conditional U.c Permit/Variance - Public Bearing Status of Application 41493 - At the March 19, 1990 meeting of the Planning Commission, members approved an entry addition at 6'xl9' to the street side of the existing residence requiring approval of excessive hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. The property was found to have approximately 4,516 s.f. or 54%. The Planning Commission based their approval on the removal of some 787 s.f. of hardcover, reducing hardcover to 45%. This approval was conditioned on applicant removing approximately 98 of hardcover, bringing the total hardcover within the 75-250' setback area to the original approved hardcover level in an earlier 1982 review. At the Council meeting, the applicant advised Council of his concern with the request to remove the additional hardcover in the granting of the approval of the hardcover variance for the entry addition noting the entry addition would result in only 30 s.f. of additional hardcover because existing paved areas already exist under the portions of the proposed entry. The applicant also advised of plans to do alterations within his lakeshore yard to decrease the erosion that was taking place from excessive runoff received from the lot to the immediate so-th. Council members also questioned the legality of the second story Lake- shore deck constructed some time in 1902 without the obvious benefit of the building permit review. Council advised the applicant that they would table all action on this application and advised the applicant to file a conditional use permit application for the proposed land alterations within the Lake- shore yard, and asked for an updated survey recording all existing and proposed hardcover on the property. A conditional use permit has bcen filed by the applicant and an updated survey submitted for the current review and the second review of application i1493. Zoning Files 41493 5 41570 August 15, 1990 Page 2 of 5 A) i1493 variances - Proposed i After -the -fact - Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 - Average lakeshore setback - after -the -fact (review Exhibit H). Note the second story deck has been placed completely in front of the average lakeshore setback line. Planning Commission will be expected to make a recommendation to the Council concerning the status of the after -the -fact phase of the application. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - 0-75' Setback Area = 4,500 s.f. Existing Hardcover = 550 s.f, or 12% per 1982 survey Existi-. Hardcover = 118.7 s.f. or 15.97% per 1990 survey (refer to Exhibits H 6 N) Proposed Hardcover = 682.4 s.f. or 15.16% (refer to Exhibit 0) Removal of 105.3 s.f. (smaller deck + cement slabs) and 69 s.f. of addn hardcover with retaining walls 75-250' Setback Area = 8,325 s.f. Existing Hardcover = 3,760 s.f. or 45% per 1982 survey Existing Hardcover = 4,990.1 s.f. or 59.94% per 1990 survey (refer to Exhibits H 6 P) Proposed Hardcover = 3,992.3 s.f. 48% (refer to Exhibit Q) Removal of 1,041.8 s.f. 6 additions of 43 s.f. (retaining walls + entry addition) List of Exhibits 3yIf 3 Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Cross Section - Retaining Walls Exhibit E - Elevation of Lakeshore Improvements Exhibit F - Holzer Plan Exhibit G - Smerling Plan Exhibit H - Updated 1990 Survey & Topographic Mapping Exhibit I - 1982 Survey Exhibit J - Planning Commission Minutes 3/19/90 Exhibit H - Council Minutes 4/9/90 Exhibit L - Floor Plan - Entry Addition Exhibit M - Street Elevations Exhibit N - Hardcover Fact Sheet 0-75' Exhibit O - Hardcover Fact Sheet Proposed 0-75' Exhibit P - Hardcover Fact Sheet Existing 75-250' Exhibit Q - Hardcover Fact Sheet Proposed 75-250' Zoning Files 41493 6 41570 August 15, 1990 Page 3 of 5 Review of Application 41493 - The updated survey shows total hardcover at 59.4 s.f. In the original review, staff found hardcover at 4,516 s.f. or 54%. The revised survey does not designate the existing hardcover area scheduled for removal. Please review Exhibit H, staff has designated the areas of landscaping underlain with plastic and the portion of gravel drive scheduled for removal. Applicant should designate the limits of the area to be removed within the off-street parking area. Staff failed to note in the original review that in 1982 surveyors did not include landscape areas with underlying plastic. Landscape area with plastic to the street side of the house appears to be 8+ years in age. Staff does reaffirm applicant's claim that in the original 1982 approval, the extended gravel parking area to the south was approved by Council as it was deemed suitable for backing out purposes. At the recent Council meeting, Glenn Cook confirmed that this area could not serve for backing out purposes, that only portions of the street right-of-way could serve for backout purposes with the limited 20' depth. Planning Commission should review the minutes of March 19, 1990, Exhibit J, to determine if the new information submitted for a second review will alter the original approval motion of the Commission. If members reaffirm the original approval, staff would ask that prior to scheduling the application before the Council, that applicant submit a survey designating all areas of hardcover to be removed. Planning Commission must also provide direction regarding the issue of the second story lakeshore deck. B) 41570 Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Required for proposed land alterations within the lakeshore yard in excess of the allowed 100 cubic yards, the installation of three tiered retaining wall at 4h' in height and involving land alterations and additional hardcover within the 0-75' setback area. - 1. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Additional hardcover reviewed in the above section. Retaining walls within 0-75' setback area = 69 s.f. (refer to Exhibits H 4 O) 2. Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 - Conditional use permit required for land alterations in excess of 100 cubic yards and the installation of three tiered retaining walls at a 44' height requires a conditional use permit. Zoning Files #1493 a 41570 August 15, 1990 Page 4 of 5 Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 - No land alterations or structures allowed within the 0-75' setback area requiring variance approval. Required - 75' Proposed - 30' (closest section of retaining wall) It should be noted that the majority of the retaining wall tiers are located within the lakeshore protected area. Review of Application - The applicant claims that his property sustains major erosion because of the land alterations approved by the City for the property located to the immediate south. The imfamous Holzer application commenced prior to the hiring of the current zoning staff, but the legal battles pursued through to 1980-81, resulting in appeals to the Supreme Court. The Holzer "after - the -fact" application involved the installation of retaining walls and major filling in the upper elevations of the property in preparation for a proposed lakeside pool. The work was conducted without the benefit of a building permit or the required conditional use permit review. At that time, accessory structures were not subject to average lakeshore setbacks. The application was denied. Please review Exhibit F, the plan presented by the applicant during the land use review. Exhibit G is an alternate plan presented by the neighbor to the immediate south of the Holzer property as another alternative (referred to hereafter as "Smerling Plan"). The Smerling Plan showed a swale leading from the north lot line to the center of the property draining to the lake. The applicant contends that a swale was to be installed within the Holzer property to prevent runoff from reaching his property line. The files do not reveal what final plans were approved for the Holzer property. The retaining walls were removed and ground cover restored. The elevations remain as they were after original filling the land alterations. If the Smerling Plan was to be the final plan approved by the City, such plan would have been marked as "final approved plan". It is doubtful whether a plan prepared by Smerling's engineer would have been the one accepted by the City. In any event, the City Engineer and staff reviewed the site noting signs of minimal erosion of the steep lakeshore yard. The yard in its present condition is very difficult to maintain. The tiering of the yard will provide gentler slopes for ease of maintenance. The applicant has not submitted information as to how much fill is to be brought in but he will provide the information to the City at our meeting. The Engineer with his original review of the plan had assigned the cutting of the bank would provide the additional fill as fill is only proposed in the upper southeast corner adjacent to the patio area and in the lower tiered area. The area immediately adjacent to the boat house show exposed sharp cuts into the bank. This area remains unprotected. Zoning Files 41493 a i1570 August 15, 1990 Page 5 of 5 In consideration of previous requests by residents to alter lakeshore banks, specifically within the Casco Point area, the hardships must not only be defined by an appl?.cant, but they must be of a magnitude that would require tte filling and the installation of three tiers of retaining walls within the Lake- shore protected area (0-75'). Based on the elevations of the yard to the immediate south, this property appears to have always received drainage and runoff. In fact, staff would suggest that the flatter yard area created with the Holzer land alterations may have provided more suitable absorption area for the runoff. The City Engineer's review comments will not be included with this packet, but will be delivered with the Friday packet. He too advises that in consideration of previous actions of the Council, that the only portion of the land alteration that appears viable, would be to allow retaining walls constructed where severe cuts remain without support adjacent to the area of the boat house and possibly a slight extension of the bank. Options of Action A) Approval of plan as submitted; B) Approval of an amended proposal; or C) Denial. CITY OF ORONO ZONING PILE 01493 i 11S70 P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 473-7357 Date of Notice: 08/28/90 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Chuck Downey COPIES TO: 2665 Casco Point Road Orono, MN 55391 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance After -the -Fact Variance (01493) Conditional Use Permit/Variance (t1570) DATE OF MEETING: August 20, 1990 VOTE: 4 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommended the following for Application 11493: Approval of additional hardcover over original recommendation of 45% note at 3979.3 s.f. or 47.7% (note this does not include 13 s.f. of additional hardcover resulting from retaining wall installation). Approval was once again conditioned on applicant removing existing hardcover in order to meet the 47.7%. Please provide plan of scheduled hardcover removals presented at Planning Commission meeting (as soon as possible). 1. As for the After -the -Fact phase of the variance application involving the second story lakeside deck, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the after -the -fact variance based on the existing topography as existing grades did not result in a visual impact upon adjacent properties. 2. Neighbors have provided written consent approving the placement of the second story deck. Planning Commission recommended the following for Application #1570: Conditional Use Permit/Variance The Planning Commission voted to table this phase of your application and provided the following directives: 1. Applicant is encouraged to seek assistance from an engineering consultant to assist in designing a plan for minimizing erosion in your lakeshore yard. It would also be helpful if your consultant met with the Orono staff so that they can provide guidelines for an improvement project. 2. The three tiers of retaining wall as proposed would seem far too intense a project based on the specific areas within the lakeshore yard that need to be addressed. 3. Applicant is also advised that if retaining walls are proposed, landscape screening is required for the lakeside of retaining walls. Please contact Jeanne Mabusth (473-7357) if you have any questions concerning the above directives. Enclosure: Please note we have enclosed Resolution #1079 which staff failed to return to you after the meeting. To- Mayor Grabek i Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Fra= Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building i Zoning Administrator Dates September 6, 1990 Subjects 1493 Chuck Downey, 2665 Casco Point Road - Variance - Resolution List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Council Minutes 10/13/82 Exhibit E - Survey 5/16/90, Revised 7/26/90 Exhibit P - Hardcover Fact Sheet Existing 0-75' Setback Area Exhibit G - Hardcover Fact Sheet Proposed 0-75' Setback Area Exhibit H - Hardcover Fact Sheet Existing 75-250' Setback Area Exhibit I - Hardcover Fact Sheet Propos,-d 75-250' Setback Area Exhibit J - Council Minutes 4/9/90 Exhibit K - 1 through 2 Letters Adjacent Meighbors Exhibit L - Floor Plan Exhibit M - Elevation/Street Please also review Planning Commission minutes of August 20,1990 enclosed in your Council packets for background information. Status of Application 1493 - At the April 9, 1990 meeting of the Council, applicant advised of future plans to perform certain land alterations and installation of retaining walls within his lakeshore yard to correct certain erosion problems. Council advised applicant that prior to acting on the current hardcover variance application, that applicant file a conditional use permit application to allow a comprehensive review of the entire improvement plan. At that same meeting, Council also advised applicant that they wish the Planning Commission to further address the issue of the deck constructed without the benefit of building permit review and Zoning File 1493 September 6, 1990 Page 2 obviously placed in front of an average Lakeshore setback line. Council stated a revised updated survey would be required before Council would act on the improvement plan. The applicant has filed a land alteration conditional use permit with the City ( 1570). Review Exhibit E. An updated survey has been submitted. The applicant proposes three tiers of retaining walls anu extensive cutting into the existing lakeshore banks to solve erosion problems within the lakeshore yard. Plarning Commission tabled all action on this phase of the applcation based on the magnitude of the proposal and the fact that the improvement would be in complete conflict with previous actions of the City. In fact, Planning Commission pointed out specific areas where erosion was found and advised applicant to amend the proposal under the guidance of the Orono staff. Planning Commission further directed that the variance phase of the application could be acted on as there appeared to be no connection between the entry addition and the proposed land alterations within the lakeshore yard. The variance application 1s presented for Council's consideration and action. 1. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 - After -the -fact average lakeshore setback variance for second story deck constructed sometime in 1982. Note the entire second story deck is located in front of the average lakeshore setback line. Planning Commission recommended approval of the after -the - fact variance. 2. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Hardcover variance review required because there already exists excessive amounts of hardcover over the allowed 25%. 75-250' Setback Area = 8,325 s.f. Existing Hardcover = 3,760 s.f. or 45% per 1982 survey Existing Hardcover = 4,990.1 s.f. or 59.94% per 1990 survey (refer to Exhibits E 6 H) Proposed Hardcover = 3,979.3 s.f. or 47.7% (refer to Exhibit I) Removal of 1,041.8 s.f. and addition of 30 s.f. (entry addition) Zoning File 1493 September 6, 1990 Page 3 Review of Hardcover Variance Application and After -the -Fact Lakeshore Setback Variance The applicant proposes construction of an entry addition to the street side of the existing structure requiring no setback variance. The entry addition consists of a 7' 11" x 6' porch with roof and an enclosed entry room 11' x 61. The entry structure will be placed over 84 s.f. of existing non-structural hardcover for a net increase of 30 s.f. of total hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. The updated survey, Exhibit E, shows existing hardcover at 4,990.1 s.f. or 59.94%. The applicant proposes removal of existing landscape areas underlain with plastic underliner and a gravel parking area adjacent to the street lot line resulting in total hardcover of 3,979.3 s.f. or 41.7%. Although the Planning Commission's original recommends -ion required removal of hardcover up to the allowed amount of an earlier 1982 review at 45%, it was noted that surveys of hardcover in that year did not include landscape areas underlain with plastic. Staff has already confirmed that in the 1982 review the expanded gravel area was approved by Council to assist in the backing out maneuver but Cook at your April meeting confirmed that based on the location of the garage, the gravel area could not serve as a turnaround area but that the right-of-way of Casco Point Road was used. The gravel area serves as only additional parking space. The Planning Commission has recommended that this be removed as a condition of the variance approval. Planning Commission recommended approval of the after -the - fact average lakeshore setback variance for the lakeshore deck consructed without a building permit sometime in 1982. They based their findings as follows: 1. Recent letters submitted by adjacent and moat affected neighbors site no problem with location of existing deck. Review Exhibit K 1-2. 2. Second story deck does not interfere with the site line views of the lake because of the sloping topographies within the lakeshore yards. Zoning File 1493 September 6, 1990 Page 4 Planning Co ission Reccs endation Hardcover Variance The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the proposed entry addition subject to the removal of existing hardcover resulting in a total hardcover within the 75-250' setback area at 3,979.3 s.f. or 47.7% After -the -Pact The Planning Commission recommended approval of the after - the -fact variance on a 3 to 2 vote. The two denial voters did not support the motion as it included a condition that would require applicant pay a double fee with building permit. The minority opinion felt that because of the lapse in t,,.ra it was not appropriate to charge the penalty fee. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission's approval recommendation for Council's review and action. Please note that the after -the -fact phase of the application has been conditioned on the penalty fee payment. If Council wishes to amend the majority action of the Planning Commission, the resolution can be amended accordingly. lsv HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET` SETBACK ZONE! (CIRCLE ONE) -i 75-250' --0-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE ___ _ __________________ �O�T' A. HOUSE 2 1. 1 X 12.3 = _ 273. / S.F. LENGTH X , X _ X S.F. X S.F. H. GARAGE X = S.F. C. DRIVEWAY X S.F. X S.F. O- SIDEWALK Z Y X 2.49 = 12, 0 S.F. 27 x 9.S 9Y•6 -- X S.F. X S.F. E. Ek"olllFft[ 7. 7. / k S. 3 r .. yo, 6 uu 2o.41 X 9.3 1d 9: 3 S.F. rcRsr- F.LA D PE f4t.ARft 1 X 4 ixl.3' N• S S.F. AR i TffRIR�2. 2 UN ALAIN t, NExtas. Jy X 2 u ' HEE ING X S.F. X S.F. G. OTHER X ��py S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE - %/8 7_ S.F. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - H SOO S.F. A 71 v;,7 _ s VSoO x i0o - /s• 97 c. oou.NFr s-a-ro __ HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSPEET S- SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) Z% ' 75-250` 250-500' $00-1000' G EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE __________________________ AOAT A. HOUSE 12, z x /2.3 = 273.1 S.F. LENGTH WIDTH .y X q S.F. x S. F. X S.F. X S.F. B. GARAGE X S.F. C. DRIVEWAY X S.F. X S.F. O..SIDEWALK ' Zy X 2.0 = y8.0 S.F. 27 x I. S 9Y. 5 x S.F. X = S. F_ ; J R.c (Lip^•.' E. "CKe.4�rr / 7. I Y S. 3 = .. 90, 6 Lo.I/ x 9.3 /iM 3 S.F. cv,c. Ic-44rd' F.LA D APE IRYUFf 2 X /.Tx yS S.F \ AR rfjAIRN 2. 2_ . UN RLA IN g . Afk Ce�.t '/% 2 A S.F S IC HEE ING X S.F. x = S.F. N.vf. GaE71°R .. x /. f e — G. OTHER X S.F. ------------- TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 7/S' 7 S.F. Q TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - - y SDO S.F. qo� v9 rl 7 ,. _ B Ysoo X ioo - /s. 97 Yo QRv PjSe 0 C•. Uot�.vEY C P•4a HARDCOVER CALCULATION 14ORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. HOUSE y03 x 3or. / = /YS V.A S.F. _. LENGTH x WIDTH . , 5 x X S.F. X S.F. 9. GARAGE 2`.2 x 2V.2- 63Y.0 S.F. yJ�GIfF tYP p IS S.F. C. URIVENAY X . X S.F. X 3. S 6 .3 S.F. D..SIDEWALX Ir ?• S 7f1. S PY x 2. /oC.y S.F. C tr6 x C 36 .for& 1AdLc X S.F. �/2-6- E. GEAT '• Y a x / G CKO/ p41i6 - x •715 _ S.F. Ofcit • • 325 F.LANDSCAPE 8 P x /• / 9� A S.F. AREAS 2 C S UNDERLAIN x Z O 0 S.F. BY PLASTIC SHEETING x . S.F. x = S.F. c/Iian.Fr y.9 C. 6 S.F. G. OTHERS �'• X -1 `- ___36------ { TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE - TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - V990./ S.F. ❑A Y3 2 5 S.F. O p y99a. / : g 832 5 x 100 S9- 9Y 10 C'. 41040,ve y S F' Y12 HARDCOVER CALCULATION HORKSHEE: SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 15-?50' 250-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. xIu,R 4,— ,).A. i kaf� w:t-a HOUSE y0.3 x .? 6'. / /YSY. P S.F. pft"U- I LENGTH WIDTH1 p ,� LY o-y !D ✓ any' x = S.F. B. GARAGE 26.2 x 2Y.2- = 63Y.0 S.F. C. YRIVEWAY x X = S.F. D. SIDEWALK /? X ].5 = 63 g,F, /or �P r 3- S x 2.8 = 7ri. s /o6.Y s.F. ��/io�j x t 1 36 ROfK Wf<t -i / x / /Jo S.F. E. PATIO/ 0 Y / YO DECK pA'" x 115 S.F. 'of 3zs r.LANDSCAPE BP x /, / Ya-, .Y S.F. Ta ik AREAS UNDERLAIN X ZOO S.F. 9Y PLASTIC SHEETING X S.F. S 3 X S.F. Kraal- 3.9 x 1-7 (. 6 G. OTHER ra,., v X - --- 36------ S.F. w*r!t � Y99o.i S.F. [-A 7325 S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE - TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - hnn v 3 n _ B 831 s x 1c0 .sen 3 5 Li 1 1q. 7' %a APPLICATION NO. 1493 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 9/18/90 --------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Chuck Downey COPIES TO: 2665 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: variance ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE ----------------------------------------------------------- OP MEETING: August 13, 1990 VOTE: 4 For 1 Against COUNCIL ACTION - MOTIONt To table your hardcover variance application (1493) that would allow a 19' x 6' entry addition until such time that Application 1570 conditional use permit is presented for formal action by the Council. Please contact the Orono Zoning staff for assistance in preparing for your conditonal use permit/variance application before the Orono Planning Commission. The following is a list of deadlines for the upcoming meetings of the Planning Co®mission: Deadline: October 1, 1990 Planning Commission meeting October 15, 1990 Deadline: November 2, 1990 Planning Commission meeting November 19, 1990 If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by th- City Council. lev To: Mayor Peterson i Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building i Zoning Administrator Date: January 16, 1991 Subject: i1570 Chuck Downey, 2665 Casco Point Road - Conditional Use Permit - Continuation of Public Hearing List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Planning Commission Minutes 8/20/90 Exhibit S - Applicant's Revised Sketch Exhibit C - Retaining Wall Section Exhibit D - Cook Report Review of Current Application At your April 20th meeting, the Planning Commission tabled the conditional use portion of the application providing applicant time to work with the City staff in order to reduce magnitude of retaining wall construction and to specifically address the areas of concern. Those areas were defined as eroding bank adjacent to boathouse and erosion near stone walk adjacent to southern lot line. Staff met with applicant and applicant's consultant in late summer. The revised plan proposes retaining walls limited to two sections with one running approximately a total of 58' parallel to the lake and continuing eastward along the access stairs. The second section will be placed along the south lot line at approximately a 3 to 3 1/2' high height for 25 +'. Please review Exhibit B. Per Planning Commission's original directive, the applicant seeks approval for replacement of access stairs within 0-75' setback area at a 3' width. Staff has been advised they will be grade level cement pads supported and surrounded by timbers. The applicant proposes the same design for the retaining wall construction and has once again submitted the same cross section. The walls adjacent to the boat house will be at approximately a 4 to 4 1/2' height. In regard to the upper wall, Cook cautions that the wall may chanielize the water and erosion problems may result. Applicant should be placed on notice that he would be expected to maintain the repair of this retaining wall in order to insure against any negative impact on the lake. In Cook's report he asks that a typical section of the wall should be strengthened by including a lower row of deadmen offset from the top row at 8' on center. Applicant is required to provide erosion control fence between the work areas on the lake. Erosion control must be installed prior to any land alteration. Zoning File #1570 January 16, 1991 Page 2 In approving the retaining wall installation and steps as shown in applicant's diagram (review Exhibit B), the following adjustments must be made to original hardcover facts approved in Application 41493: 0-75' setback area _ 4,500 s.f. original hardcover Z 718.7 a.f. or 15.97% Approved with 41493 - 682.4 s.f. or 15.16% (removal of 105.3 s.f. and 69 s.f. new hardcover) • Adjusted hardcover per current proposal - 652.9 s.f. or 14.5% • Original steps a 142.5 s.f. Proposed steps = 153 s.f For an increase in hardcover of 10.5 s.f. Retaining walls - 29 s.f. additional :iardcover Applicant proposes removal of 105.: s.f. of existing hardcover Total reduction of 65.8 s.f. of hardcover 75-250' satback area .8 325 ■.f. Or�inal��ver - s.f1,990. . or 59.94% Approved hardcover with Applicant 41493 - 3979.3 s.f. or 47.7% Proposed hardcover with installation of new stairs and retaining walls - 3,968.8 s.f. or 47.6t• • Reduction of 20.5 s.f. for reduced stairs at width of 3' Addition of 10 s.f. for retaining wall Total reduction of 10.5 s.f. of hardcover Options of Action Denial - Please refer to the necessary sections within the conditional use permit section of your Code for necessary findings. Approval - Members may consider the following findings for approval: 1. Application proposes an overall reduction in hardcover within designated setback areas. 2. Proposed land alterations and installation of retaining walls will stabilize the banks and prevent further erosion. 3. the stability of an existing boat house will be secured and erosion of lakeside banks protected. Zoning Pile #1590 January 16, 1991 Page 3 Approval is subject to the following conditions: Applicant is placed on notice that the upper wall section may channelize water and create further erosion problems. Applicant is responsible for the repair of these areas in order to minimize erosion and protect quality of run-off into lake. Typical section of wall shall be strengthened by including a lower row of deadmen offset from the top row at 0' on center. 3. Applicant shall be required to provide erosion control fence between the work areas and the lake. Such erosion control to be established prior to any land alteration. Prior to scheduling the comprehensive application before the Council, applicant must provide an updated survey designating existing hardcover improvements to be removed. Applicant has provided hardcover fact sheets designating areas of hardcover removals. This information must be transposed to survey for inclusion with approval resolution and for staff use in the field. Inv Inv ZONING PILE NO. 1570 CITE OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 1/24/91 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO$ Chuck Downey COPIES TOt 2665 Casco Point Rd Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPR OF APPLICATIONt Variance/Conditional Use Permit ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MRETING: 1/22/91 VOTES 6 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the Eollwing: Tabling all action on your application until ether you as applicant or an authorized representative is able to attend. Staff will reschedule your application before the Planning Commission at their February 19, 1991 meeting. Please note this is a Tuesday night. Please see that an authorized representative is able to attend to represent your interests if you find that you are unable to attend the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission. Sos Mayor Peterson 4 Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building 6 Zoning Administrator Date: March 6, 1991 Subject: f1493 6 f1570 Chuck Downey, 2665 Casco Point Road - Variance/Conditional Use Permit - Resolution The comprehensive application review involves the following ordinances 1. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 - After-ther-Pact Average Lakeshore Setback Variance for second story deck constructed sometime in 1982. Note: Entire second story deck is located in front of the average lakeshore setback line. Review Exhibits J. M-1 and M-2. At the August 20, 1990 meeting of the Planning Commission, members recommended approval of the after -the -fact variance for the lakeside deck subject to the applicant obtaining a building permit and paying appropriate penalty fees. 2. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 (a) - Hardcover variances required for new improvements within 0-75' and 75-250' setback areas. a. 0-75' setback area - 4,500 s.f. Existing - 718.7 ■.f. or 15.970 Proposed - 652.9 ■.f. or 14.51• Original steps - 142.5 s.f. Proposed steps - 153 ■.f., a net increase of 10.5 ■.f. Retaining walls - 29 s.f. additional hardcover • Applicant proposes removal of 105.3 s.f. of existing hardcover (90.6 s.f. of structural hardcover) for a reduction of 66.3 s.f. of hardcover within the 0-75' setback area. b. 75-250' setback area - 8,325 s.f. Existing hardcover - 4,990.1 s.f. or 59.940 Approved hardcover in Application 4707 (1982) - 3,760 s.f. or 45% Proposed hardcover - 3,967.8 s.f. or 47.61• • 114 s.f of entry addition + 10 s.f. for retaining wall matched with removals of 1,136.3 ■.f. of paved/gravel driveway, landscape area underlain with plastic. Refer to Exhibits I and J. Zoning Pile 41493 4 i1570 Page 2 Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 - Land Alterations involving retaining walls within the 0- 75' setback area require both a conditional use permit and variance approval as no land alterations or structures are allowed within the 0-75' setback area. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Nap Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit 0 - Council Minutes 10/13/82 Exhibit E - Street Elevation Exhibit P - Floor Plan Exhibit G-1 - Hardcover/Existing 0-75' Exhibit G-2 - Hardcover Proposed 0-75' Exhibit H - Hardcover Existing 75-250' Exhibit 1 - Hardcover Proposed 75-250' Exhibit J - Survey -Revised 7/26/90 Exhibit E-1, E-2 - Cook Reports Exhibit L - Cross Profile Retaining Walls Exhibit M-1, M-2 - Letters from Adjacent Neighbors Exhibit N - Planning Commission Minutes - 2/20/90, 3/19/90, 8/20/90 Exhibit 0 - Council Minutes for 9/90, 9/10/90 Review of Application #1493 - At the September 10, 1990 meeting of the Council, Council tabled all action on the hardcover variance application phase of this review as applicant proposed major land alterations involving tiers of retaining wall within his lakeshore yard. Application i1493 involved a hardcover variance for a 6' x 19' street side addition to the existing residence. Half of the structure would be an enclosed entry addition and the second half an open porch with roof overhead. The new addition required no setback variances only a hardcover variance within the 75-250' setback area. 84 square feet of the area covered by the 114 square foot entry addition was already covered with non- structural hardcover consisting of landscape area underlain with plastic and paved walkways. As already noted in the hardcover facts above, with the addition of 124 s.f. of structural hardcover (114 ■.f., entry addition - 10 s.f., retaining wall), applicant proposes a matched removal of 1,136.3 s.f. of non- structural hardcover. Zoning Pile i1493 i i1570 Page 3 The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the vroposed entry addition subject to the removal of existing haracover as set forth above in the hardcover facts. Although the Planning Commission's original recommendation required removal of hardcover up to the allowed amount of an earlier 1982 review at 45%, it was noted that surveys of hardcover in that year did not include landscape areas underlain with plastic. In addition staff had already confirmed that in the 1982 review, the expanded gravel area was approved by Council to assist in the backing out maneuver. Cook at an earlier meeting confirmed that based on the location of the garage, the gravel area could not serve as a turnaround area but that the right-of-way of Casco Point Road was used. The existing gravel area serves as only additional parking space. The Planning Commission has recommended that this be removed as a condition of the variance approval. The Planning Commirsion recommended approval of the after - the -fact average lakeshore setback variance for the lakeshore deck constructed without a building permit sometime in 1982. They based their findings as follows: Recent letters submitted by adjacent and most affected neighbors site no problem with location of existing deck. Review Exhibits M-1 and M-2. Second story deck does not interfere with the site line views of lake because of the sloping topographies within the lakeshore yards. The Planning Commission .recommended approval of the after - the -fact variance at a 3 to 2 vote. The 2 denial voters did not support the motion as it included a condition that would require applicant to pay a double fee with building permit. The minority opinion felt that because of the lapse in time it was not appropriate to charge the penalty fee. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Plann� Commission's approval recommendation for Council's review an, action. Please note that the after -the -fact phase of the application has been conditioned on the penalty fee payment. If Council wishes to amend the majority action of the Planning Commission, the resolution can be amended accordingly. Review of Application #1570 - Review Exhibit J. Members will note levels of tiered retaining walls shown on the original land alteration plans for applicant's lakeshore yard. In the first review the Pia;:ning Commission denied the request finding the plan did not address the real erosion problems within th lakeshore yard. The Zoning File 41493 i i1570 Page 4 Planning Commission requested that applicant meet with staff so that plans could be amended to reduce magnitude of retaining wall construction and to specifically address the areas of concern. Those areas were defined as an eroding bank adjacent to boathouse and erosion near stonewalk adjacent to-bouthern lot line. The revised plan proposes retaining walls limited to two sections with one running approximately 45' parallel to the lake and continuing eastward along the access stairs. The second section will be placed along the south lot line at approximately a 3 to 3-1/2' height for 25+. The plan also shows the access stairs within the 0-75' and within the 75-250' setback area. The stairs will be reinstalled at a 3' minimum width. Review Exhibit L. The walls adjacent to the boathouse will be at approximately a 4 to 4-1/2' height. As for the upper wall along the southern lot line, Cook cautions that the wall may channelize the water and erosion problems may result. Applicant should be placed on notice that he would be expected to maintain/repair this retaining wall in order to ensure against any negative impact on the lake. In Cook's report (Exhibit 9-2), he asks that a typical section of the wall be strengthened by including a lower row of deadman offset from the top row at 8' on center. Applicant is required to provide erosion control fence between the work areas on the lake. Erosion control must be installed prior to any land alteration. Hardcover within the 0- 75' setback area will be increased 29 z.f. and 10 s.f. in the 75- 250' setback area as already noted above in the hardcover facts. Members unanimously approved the land alterations within the lakeshore protected area and 75-250' setback area as shown on Exhibit J based on the following findings: Application proposes an overall reduction in hardcover within designated setback areas. Proposed land alterations and installation of retaining walls will stabilize the banks and prevent further erosion. The stability of an existing boathouse will be secured and erosion of lakeside banks minimized. Approval would be subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant is placed on notice that the upper wall section may channelize water and create further erosion problems. Applicant is responsible for the repair of these areas in order to minimize erosion and protect quality of run-off into lake. Zoning File i1493 c f1570 Page 5 2. Typical section of wall shall be strengthened by including a lower row of deadman offset from the top row at 8' on center. Applicant shall be required to provide erosion control fence between the work areas and lake. Such erosion control to be established prior to any land alteration. A single resolution has been drafted for both Applications #1493 and #1570 that incorporates the findings and conditions in the approval recommendation of the Planning Commission. lav A IL ./L I 19 C. oocuvpY 6—p 90 HARDCOVER CALCULATION HORKSHEET ~ SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-7 ' 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE — ______________ A. HOUSE Z 2• Z X 11.3 273.1 S.F. LENGTH x , I X X S.F. X = S.F. B. GARAGE X = S.F. C. DRIVEWAY X S.F. % — = S.F. D..SIDEWALK ' ZS/ X 2.49 rev. 0 S.F. 27 x I.S 91y.5 % = S.F. % S.F. E. Q11T1eP/fr r/ 7. k S. 3 r 90. C DECK 2 0. y - x 9.3 = . /69: 3 S.F. ('ow.C. A40p F. LAO APE femoot 2 X/. Sx/.S yS S.F. All TEfooRor 2. 2 MUN RLAIN B . Mfxx Coif Y X 7 = A S.F. S IC HEE ING X S.F. X = S.F. Co. e. Carla / 9 x /. S' r G. OTHER X S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE - WE 7 S.F. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - C/ SOO S.F. a ❑A 7/y;7 _ g 7S0-9 x 100 - /5.97 - C. DOC✓NfY - 6- y-Yo _ __ HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) O-1 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' G �i EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE _______________________ Qot r A. HOUSE 1 X /2.3 = 273.1 S.F. LENGTH WIDTH X S.F. iLt�w---, 4,✓� x = fog S. v.:uJ X = S.F. X S.F. B. GARAGE X = S.F. C. DRIVEWAY X = S.F. x = S.F. D.. SIDEWALK 7 x 2• D = y8. 0 S.F. z� x i.s 9Y.s x = S.F. E. PA"M .oFi r I7. i a yo. 6 s. F--.o X S. 3 DECK 20.y x 9.3 = /G 9:3 S.F. ('In+f. IcAOS' F.LA 0 APEftA/tfT 2 x /SH/.S = yS S.F\ P,.e AR TftAIA�i UN RLAIN �. 2 ru B % NFxxco.,r x 1 A S.F. s IC SEE ING X = S.F. x - S.F. G. OTHER X = S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE - 7/8 7 S.F. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - y SOo S.F. Ann v'{ ri 7� .7 _ e ysoo x ioo - /5. 97 0 P��Se o A,nos2 <-- ,)A�j w HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' Z5-2$0' 250-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE T HOUSE Yo.3 x 36./ = /YSv.a S.F. lllo"t.- LENGTH WIDTH q •'K I1W_�$ B. GARAGE 26.2 x 2Y.2 = 6p3VY.0 S.F. ylArt J!✓ p IS S.F. �� iL�Xo C. URI VEWAY X = X = S.F. D.. SIDEWALK /aa x �. S = 6-i S.F. f f x x g. s 2.9 = a r/. s /06. Y S.F. L4 L�o� ( ima x ` 3 6 .foe* wdu /d If S.F. E. PATIO/ �► Y a x / .. r17 ECK DPAri� X = 3/5 S.F. OFt.t - 325 F.LANOSCAPE F8 X / _ 96 A S.F.\ T.. At AREAS 2 ($ L.Q"' -o UNDERLAIN - - 200 S.F. BY K PLASTIC SHEETING X = S.F. r1m SY.. c It.J Q6 Y (/. s c/3 % = S.F. 1.7 (. 6 G. OTHER rm.r J ./ x / = 36 S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER III ZONE - Y 990. / S.F. El TOTAL PROPERTY AREA III ZONE - S.F. ftA..A Wyl•Y nnn 4 3 yo n`pry99�. /1 - 8 832 5 x 1ao 4 €5 ok 7• 7 c Sonestroo m c eMm n JA blmc a.l�rn p�l�� Rosem WwIF Mv. If Anderlik & EE „CIE ■11■ Assoclates !"" f """�tFpneL CPA Fnpin--rs i Archttects January 9, 1991 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: File No. 139.1570 Chuck Downey Dear Jeanne, p Arein FE fn..nr Nlvp, rf Mbr A,nnK f w fear. 11 WL E M IF L 1,lp Mot l li m Clwlrc w Ce .IA Y CrLnMLIu —/ d A Y ft iMnVl1 xft / M 6q A1C1 MCLA MYCT IF WgAA fIA</E 11T/O LIE N f IF 4 J Fex,ln 1F CMO CMR[ IE MtMT YONrn. If MlL A IF ape, f gl4ee IE f ILR,k IE I,tlp 1 Cilxtl rF C CJ/W WRn If . O4WIf Wft CNpLF IMneWIF WL MUM Pw IE MOIMC 4/¢e IF fl . MA I,M40T YwL E MpILL IF CiyF gLIY[ /F ff JAN 1 1 IM We have reviewed the Chuck Downey application for installation of retaining walls. The plan provides for approximately 75 feet of retaining wall on the property. Approximately 65 feet of the wall will be located in the 0-75' setback area. The section of wall (25'm) next to the boathouse is necessary to prevent failure of the bank and protect the boathouse. The remaining sections are to reduce maintenance problems in the yard. The typical section for the wall should he strengthened by including a lower row of deadmen as shown, offset from the top row at g' on center. The property owner should be required to provide erosion control fence between the work areas and the lake. The upper wall could channelize the water and erosion problems would result. The owners will be required to repair these areas and continue to protect the lake as necessary after the work is completed. Please contact this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:Ii Encl. 139.cor 2335 %Wst HWMay 36 ! St. Paul, Mlmesota 5SI13 a 612-63646W Sty C11D bleNn 4elw GppE rE LR{E uAAAM 1 tMY AJA /yam Sonestioo sea EppR. IF .DMw W EO/[ IE Mn�L- I rE I rE GryI nY[Y[ IE 1 rF bad C MM1L IE C IY.n L bn14 rE WYtl C 4qR IF Y,A' A tT/VIt It t. M[E M EpM,I C EbR AIA I If `tA, L Tfp QMl l rf y RosJe_ne� f[IWF NV.1 IWK IF fIPrAMpCIE E 1/I!1 C CM[ rE FOUPE [U [ F!tt IF MPgtl A Lf:6 IF V-M,CIEMLAII A M Yb w" _ L `_M A,1e ,IR CY,n E CWl IE MLMI E YNvn IF OlM l FpalYl. rF D 1EMY4 E W/a IE Mpl,l E AR,k It LV[ A 1,p rE C. IAI If CetEo dw. rf Associates Mp G YnR rF DrgO aYva if 'W Car rE C.A E. yM M EMM1[ CIA .. R.. IE ..= IF MO M rlMMy IbiaYC Ly IF IN[DW PE MC Efsglnee s i Archttects August 15. 1990 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323 Attn: Jeanne Mabusth Re: Chuck Downey Property Our Pile No. 139-1570 Dear Jeanne: We have reviewed the retaining wall construction proposed on the Chuck Downey property on Casco Point Road. The retaining wall plan appears to be in excess of what is necessary for bank stabilisation. The bank from the house to the lake is very steep and would be difficult to maintain. than is not a significant ■mount of erosion evident on the property even though we have had a very wet summer. There does appear to be a need for a retaining wall on the east side of the boathouse. This wall could be extended along the walkway area about 25 feet to allow proper grading. We would not recommend that the other walls be constructed as there does not appear to be a need for bank stabilisation. Please contact this office if you have any questions Yours very truly, RONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIR k ASSOCIATES. INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC.dh grc/69 2335 West HWMay 36 s St. PML MIMewta 55113 • 612-6364600 Es ra�e TyP. CQOSS-SEcrzcN SC&L E : 3 -0" RErAiNiNG gfrrY � Cw.ex•. �4&S C+cco V nye*rN I MAL WA L L }02 DOWNEY' €'r Qa�l w.11 4' Ze,,11,,, 8'-0' o� �Sx(� Soa �e� �''•C �;nbtr( +1q- P« rr cs+t ps saJ ;A pair.I DATE: O8/19/90 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: IT WAS BROUC9T TO MY ATTENTION, THAT THERE MAY BE CONCERN REGARDING Thy SETBACK OF CHUCK DOWNEY'S DECK. I WOULD LIKE TO INFORM YOU THAT WE HAVE NO CONCERN ABOUT THE PRESENT STRUCTURE. IN ADDITION, THE DECK IS NOT RESTRICTING TO OUR VIEW AND WE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE LOCATION OF THE DECK. IF YOU NEED FURTHER INFORMATION OR HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL. SINCERELY, TY M4-- - T�� VTd� b O J /70✓APO✓u %�/nJ W � /� 7 ^ < 'v O (y N ��/ J (il G c � Lc.f / / � // /✓0 6✓ N MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COHMISS:O11 MEETING FEBRUARY 20, 1990 ♦1492 MARE GROSS CONS'. Bellows suggested that as long as an updated survey is needed for the building permit, this item be tabled to allow for Planning Commission review. Bellows also indicated that she had difficulty accepting the hardship. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning C�;.mmiss •�ner Cohen, seconded by Planning Commissioner Bellows, to -o' a this item until an updated survey is submitted. Motic :.yes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. •1.493 CROCK DOWNEY 2665 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8z07 P.M. TO 8:15 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Nailing were duly noted. Mr. Downey was present for this public hearing. Mabusth explained that Mr. Downey is seeking approval of a hardcover variance within the 75-250' setback area for the addition of a 19' x 6' entryway. Mabusth noted that hardcover has increased since variance approval was given in 1982. Mabusth said that staff observed a second story deck which was not shown on the 1982 survey and no record of a permit for that structure exists. Mr. Downey said that the deck was added at the same time the garage was constructed. It was his understanding that the deck was covered under the permit for the garage. Mabusth said that the 1982 resolution approved 45% hardcover for the garage addition. Kelley said that Mr. Downey is in violation of that r solution. Mr. Downey said that he did not understand staffs hardcover calculations of the house. Kelley said that a review 'f the existing hardcover should be done before this proceeds any r;rthrr. Nabusth asked the Planning Commission to provide d1recticn for Mr. Downey. 8 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 20, 1990 ♦1693 CHUCK DOMNEY CONT. Kelley indicated that he would prefer to have hardcover remain at the level approved in 1982. Mr. Downey asked if he accepted staff's calculations what he would have to do to be within the Planning Commission's recommendation. Bellows replied that it would be Mr. Downey's discretion as to what he proposed to remove. She suggested tabling this application to provide time for Downey to re-evaluate this existing hardcover rn the property and determine what could be removed. Mabusth said that the applicant is in a hurry. She suggested that the Planning Commission recommend denial of this application. The applicant could bring the hardcover information to Council for their review. It was the general consensus of the Planning Commission that the matter come back to the Planning Commission for review. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. Kelley asked how the City would monitor :,ia to make sure that the hardcover percentage dons not increase. Mabusth replied that the City does not Naze enough staff to monitor these situations. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Bellows, to table this application pending the receipt of all information needed to determine existing and proposed hardcover. Bellows put Ms. Downey on notice that the Planning Commission prefers to see hardcover remain at 451. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. 71496 IRANCIS LIGHTLY 3585 FREDRICK STREET VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8s17 P.M. TO 8=26 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. and Mrs. Lightly were present for this matter. 9 MINUTES OF MARCH 19, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 1� GABRIEL JABBOUR CONTINUED Chairman Kelley allowed Mr. Jabbour the opportunity to speak, but asked him to hold his comments within a 5-minute time period. Mr. Jabbour said, "As you probably know, I appeared two weeks ago before the City Council expressing concern and critcism about the Planning Commission. I am concerned about the way in which Orono has been treating the lakeshore and Lake Minnetonka. In 1975 Orono adopted our present Ordinance and it was an exceptionally good first attempt to address all of the unique concerns Orono has to address. Orono always set the pace for other municipalities to follow. Lately, I find there is a sense of confusion regarding what our Ordinance intended to do and the way in which it is being interpreted. I am concerned about the way in which non -conforming structures within 0-75' of the lake are being addressed. we dealt with those in the past with a non -conforming use ordinance. I have been advised by City Staff that you can no longer deal with non -conforming structures in that way because they are not a use, they are a structure. In 1975 our Code said specifically that any structure which did not have an appraised market value over $3,500 would be torn down. The City did not take it upon themselves to go door-to-door to assure that those structures were torn down, but felt that as time went by they would address this issue. I had one of those structures on my property and I took out a permit from City Hall and tore it down. Lately we have a lot of residents coming to the City to ask for additions to their primary structures within 75' of the lake. The City has allowed the trading of hardcover to allow these additions to be constructed. The hardcover addition may be a wash out compared to the removals, but the intent of the Ordinance was that the non -conforming structures would be eliminated. I feel it is the duty of the Planning Commission to amend the ordinance if a loop -hole is found to exist. I wish that the Planning Commission w-uld change its position from being reactive to proactive. Orono was always ten steps ahead. I feel the Planning Commission is sending a message to residents: If you want to build within 0-75' of the lake, go now and put in a rock garden with plastic underlining. Then come back to the City and trade your plastic underlining in for a new living room. I would like to see that message changed." 11493 CHUCK DONNEY 2665 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCE CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:40 P.M. TO 7:45 P.M. Mr. Downey was present for the continuation of this public hearing. Zoning Administrator Mabusth reviewed the information regarding this application. Mabusth presented new information r MINUTES OF MARCH 19, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING N ZONING FILE t1493-DOWNEY CONTINUED regarding the amount of hardcover Mr. Downey will remove from his property to maintain 45% hardcover in the 75-250' setback area. Mr. Downey indicated that he had measured his garden before coming to this meeting and found it to be 157 feet. Kelley clarified that Mr. Downey is proposing to remove 142 s.f. of hardcover from what is shown as Area A on Exhibit L of staff's memo. Brown noted that Mr. Downey would also remove hardcover from the driveway. Mabusth stated that is what Mr. Downey is proposing. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. Hanson said, "The hardcover issue then has been resolved by the applicant agreeing that hardcover will remain at 45%. We should consider the information presented this evening as an amendment to what we received earlier." Kelley noted that staff estimated that 54% hardcover existed in the 75-250' setback area. Kelley asked Mr. Downey if he agreed with that estimate. Mr. Downey indicated that he did not have time to do any more measuring and that as would accept staff's estimate. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Hanson, to recommend approval of the revised proposal for the Downey residence at 2665 Casco Point Road, subject to final staff measurements determining that 45% hardcover exists within the 75-250' setback area. Motion, Ayes-3, Johnson, Nay. Motion passed. Johnson felt that the use of the property was being intensified and that n,• -structural hardcover is being traded for structural ha.dcover. 41494 FRANCIS LIGHTLY 3585 FREDERICK STREET VARIANCES REFERRED BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION Mr. and Mrs. Lightly were present for this matter. Mabusth presented the revised plan submitted by the Lightly's. Mabusth asked Mr. Lightly to explain why he was no longer planning to remove hardcover from the west side of the driveway. Mr. Lightly said, "Originally we were removing 200-250 s.f. - 7 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 10, 1990 ZONING FILE 41573-BELLY/NASSEY CONTINUED seconded. Mabusth advised Ms. Kelly that this subdivision would be subject to the new p:.rk dedication fees. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. 41571 JOANN GRIMES/JAMES HOFFMAN 4720 NORTH ARM DRIVE WEST VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS PUBLIC HEARING 7:35 P.M. TO 7:37 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Ms. Grimes was present. Gaffron stated that the vacation of drainage and utility easements is necessary due to the recently approved lot line rearrangement. Hanson asked, "Is the City still unaware of any existing utilities within the existing easement?" Gaffron replied, "That is correct." It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of application #1571, vacation of drainage and utility easements at 4720/4730 North Arm Drive West. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. 15 7G CHUCK DOWNEY 2665 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCES REFERRAL FROM COUNCIL AND i1570 CHUCK DOWNEY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIAMC? PUBLIC HEARING 7:38 P.M. TO 7:57 P.M. Mr. Downey was present. Mabusth provided a review of this application, and the action previously taken by the Planning Commission and Council (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated August 15, 1990). She said, "The applicant is asking for your special consideration to allow him to have 48% hardcover, rather than 45% as previously approved." She asked Mr. Downey to provide staff with a sketch showing the area of hardcover that he intends to remove. Bellows noted that the after -the -fact deck must also be addressed. Mabusth said, "Staff was asked to determine where the average lakeshore setback line. We have no record of a building permit for the deck in 1982. Mr. Downey assumed that his - 3 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE /1493/11570-DONNEY CONTINUED contractor had included the deck in the permit for the garage, which was constructed at the same time. The deck is in fact in front of the average lakeshore setback line." Bellows added, "Portions of the principal structure are located in front of the average Lakeshore setback line." Mr. Downey stated that he has letters from the neighbors on both sides of his property indicating that they have no objections. Hanson said, "It appears to me that the deck does not obscure the neighbors' views. The standard issues that we address when looking at the average lakeshore setback, in this case are almost irrelevant." Bellows concurred with Hanson but stated that there are many other aspects of this property that must also be addressed. She asked Mabusth to proceed with the review of application 11570. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mabusth reviewed the history of this property relating to the cause of Mr. Downey's drainage problems (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated August 15, 1990). She said, "I have no indication of what resulted from the litigation that occurred. The City Engineer and I looked at the property and oid not see signs of severe erosion, which one would expect due to the steep slopes." Mabusth displayed the sketch showing the three-tier plan Mr. Downey is proposing. She said, "I believe that very little fill would be brought in based on the proposed elevations." Mr. Downey said, "My landscape architect has indicated to me that 40 yards of fill will be needed." Johnson asked Mabusth to show where the cuts are to be made. Mabusth indicated where cuts will be made and said. "There are already severe, exposed cuts behind the boat house that will require a retaining wall." Downey referred to the conditions and provisions set forth in Resolution #1079 (Holzer application -property to immediate south). He said, "That appears to be the final plan and it shows where drainage is supposed to go. If you look at the recent survey. you can see that, is not occurring." Bellows said. "In my opinion, the condition created by the project next door should be corrected. There is no other place - 4 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1493/41570-DOWNEY CONTINUED for runoff to go other than Mr. Downey's property. Mabusth replied, "Water has always drained down to Mr. Downey's property." Mr. Downey disagreed. He said, "The neighbor brought in a tremendous amount of fill. There was drainage onto my property, but it was not as severe as it is now since the retaining walls were removed. I know Maureen was out to look at the property. Does the Planning Commission believe there is drainage coming from the neighbor's property?" Rowlette replied, "There is no doubt about it. You can see evidence of where the water is draining and there are exposed tree roots." The other Planning Commission members concurred. Bellows said, "I am concerned about Mr. Downey's proposal to resolve the problem. I do not see that what is proposed will fix the area that has had the most severe erosion. The area by the stone path, as you are approaching the deck, is vcry unstable. I agree that something needs to be done, but this pia.: will not accomplish what you are trying to achieve." Bellows referred to the letter from the City Engineer. She said, "It is Glenn Cook's opinion that the retaining wall planned is in excess of what is necessary for bank stabilization. He is calling for a retaining wall along the east side of the boat house. However, he is not in favor of the other walls as shown." Mr. Downey replied, "I am trying to save as much money as possible and am, therefore, receptive to the City Engineer's comments. I would be happy to cut back the size of the wall. My biggest concern is the boat house. I'm afraid that erosion will move the boat '.souse out of its present location." Bellows asked Hr. Downey how the boat house is currently being used. fir. Downey replied. "It is being used as a recreational area for my children and for a place to store water skis, etc." Hanson said, "I am in agreement that some form of retaining walls are necessary to deal with erosion, particularly at the east wall of the boat house. I concur with Maureen that the area near the deck needs attention. However, I also agree with the comments from the City Engineer. 1 would suggest that Mr. Downey get another assessment for resolving the pr:wlem from another source. we could table this application for another month." - 5 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE 414113/41570-DONKEY CONTINUED Mr. Downey said, "I was hoping to have been able to start the house remodeling by now. I would like to solve the drainage problem, but that could wait until spring. Council asked to see the conditional use permit before they would approve the front entry proposal." Rowlette asked whether the applications could be separated. Mabusth suggested that the Planning Commission make a strong recommendation to Council that they act separately on the variance phase of the application. She said, "The Planning Commission could provide the reasons for delaying a recommendation on the conditional use permit. There is really no connection between the two applications. I would suggest to fir. Downey that he have his landscape architect meet with City staff to receive some direction. Perhaps the Planning Commission can also provide some direction as to what they would like to see." There were no comments from the public pertaining to this application and the Public Hearing was continued. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Bellows, to recommend approval of the applicant's proposal for 488 hardcover. Hanson stated that 488 is reasonable based on the fact that the landscaping was not included in the 1982 survey by Mr. Downey's contractors. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of the after -the -fact average lakeshore setback variance for a second story deck, conditioned on the applicant paying a double fee for the permit. Hanson based his recommendation on the fact that the second story deck does not interfere with the sight -line views of the lake for the properties on either side. Johnson believed that in light of the time that has elapsed it is appropriate to waive the double fee. Rowlette concurred. Motion. Ayes-3, Rowlette, Johnson, Nay. Motion carried. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Hanson, to table application 41570, to allow time for Mr. Downey to work with City staff and his contractor to design a mininal retaining wall system that will address the primary areas of concern. Those areas include the boat house, and the stone walk near the deck. Bellows noted that Mr. Downey will require approval to have the lakeshore stairs repaired and that should be included in his application. Johnson stated that he could not see how the three- tier plan would work and suggested that fir. Downey may wish to re- evaluate that aspect of the plan as well. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. - 6 - MINUTES OF ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 9, 1990 Q #1493 CHUCK DONNEY 2665 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION Mr. Downey was present for the review of his variance application. Bernhardson provided a brief history of this property, as well as information regarding what is currently proposed. Mr. Downey commented that though he had agreed to the Planning Commission's recommendation, it was not something that he wished to do. He said, "I've been told I'm some kind of a bad guy because hardcover on my property mysteriously increased to 52%. The sidewalk leading to the house was put in at the same time the garage was constructed. The City Building Inspector was there and saw what I was doing. There was a survey done in 1982 that showed what my hardcover was. I did not submit a new survey with this application, I used the old one. I was instructed by the City that in order to build my garage I had to widen the driveway so I would not back directly onto the road. There was part gravel, on the south side, which had been blacktop at one time. The City is now asking me to take away what they asked me to install. To my knowledge the City was aware of everything I did in 1982. The only area I can see that would have increased hardcover is that I may have blacktopped more driveway area. It • is a real hardship to have to remove hardcover. I have to weigh the benefits of having a driveway versus an entry addition." Mabusth stated that staff had suggested to Mr. Downey that he provide an updated survey. She said that staff has not received an updated survey. Mabusth noted that there is a second story deck that was constructed without a permit and does not appear on the survey submitted with the application. Mr. Downey stated that if there was a 4% or 58 difference in the amount of existing hardcover, it should not matter. Mabusth indicated that 4% or 5% would make a significant difference. Councilmember Goetten indicated that an updated survey is necessary for an accurate review of an application. Goetten asked Mr. Downey if he had in fact constructed the second story deck with no permit. Mabusth stated that Mr. owney had indicated that the second story deck was included ii, the application for the garage. Mabusth informed the Council that she had reviewed that application and it applied only to the garage. • Mr. Downey added that it was his understanding that his 4 - MINUTES OF ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 9, 1990 ` ZONING FILE #1493-DOMNEY CONTINUCD contractor had obtained all of the necessary permits to construct the garage and the deck. Mabusth asked City Engineer Cook if the gravel area on the property would provide a sufficient turn around. Cook indicated that the turn around would almost have to be on Casco Point Road to be effective. Mabusth noted that the addition of the entry would only increase hardcover 30 s.f. because it is placed over existing sidewalk and a step area. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten to approve the hardcover variance in accordance with Planning Commission recommendation to maintain hardcover at 45%. Also, the boathouse is a non -conforming building and is subject to all pertinent ordinances. There was no second. Councilmember Nettles asked staff if they were satisfied with the present status of the second story deck, or would they prefer to explore that further. Mabusth replied that staff would proceed in accordance with Council direction. She commented that it is always difficult for staff to accurately evaluate an application without an updated survey. Mabusth suggested amending the Resolution to advise the #AA applicant that an updated survey will be required for any future improvements to this property. Mr. Downey stated that he would be coming back to the City in one month to apply for a permit for retaining walls. Mr. Downey said that due to the improvements to the neighboring property, he now has serious erosion problems. Mabusth asked Mr. Downey if he would be willing to combine the retaining wall application with this variance application. Mr. Downey stated that originally he had intended to do that. In order that he might proceed as quickly as possible with the entryway project, staff advised him to submit separate applications. Mabusth suggested that this application be tabled and allow the applicant to submit a fully amended application including a conditional use permit for land alterations. She asked Mr. Downey to submit a fully updated survey with that application. Callahan noted that in light of adding the conditional use permit, the application would have to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. - 5 - MINUTES OF ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 9, 1990 ZONING FILE /1493-DOMMEY CONTINUED O It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to refer this matter back to the Planning Commission pending the receipt of a comprehensive application with an updated survey. Hanson noted tnat the Planning Commission would approve of the iscommendation. Bernhardson stated that staff would review the second story deck issue and that the fee for the revised application would be calculated as though Mr. Downey had originally submitted a comprehensive application. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. #1494 FRANCIS S. LIGHTLY 3585 FREDERICK STREET VARIANCES Mr. and Mrs. Lightly were present for this matter. Bernhardson briefly explained the applicants' original and revised proposal to construct an addition, a pool and patio. Mr. Lightly explained the two lines that have been drawn to depict the average lakeshore setback. Mayor Grabek asked if the neighbors (Braaten and McLeod, 3`63 Frederick Street) were still objecting to the Lightlys' proposal. ' Mr. Lightly replies. "we discussed our original plan with them and had reached an agreement with them. If we placed landscaping along the lot line, we could overcome their objection to seeing the structure itself. we have since revised our plan so that the structure is setback an additional 13 feet." Mayor Grabek asked if the neighbors were aware of the revised plan. Mr. Lightly stated that the neighbors have not seen the revised plan. Mabusth noted that only the pool and p iu would encroach into the average lakeshore setback area. Goetten stated that the purpose of the average lakeshore setback Ordinance is to prevent structure from obstructing the views of adjacent neighbors. Shc said that a pool would not obstruct any views of the lake. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to give conceptual approval to allow 42.5% hardcover to exist in the 75-250' setback area and to approve the average lakeshore setback variance, per staff recommendation. Motion Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. 6 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 O #1493 CHUCK DOWNEY 2665 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCE Mr. Downey was present. Bernhardson 5ovided a brief summary of Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated September 6, 1990. Bernhardson noted that the Planning Commission has recommended approval of this application with a 3 to 2 vote. He said. "The two descending votes were based on opinion that the applicant should not pay a double fee for the after -the -fact portion of the application." Mabusth added that the Planning Commission also reviewed Mr. Dowrey's Conditional Use Permit application. She said, "They recommended that the Variance application be separated from the Conditional Use Permit application. This stemmed from Mr. Downey's request to be able to proceed with the front entry project to his house. It will be necessary for Mr. Downey to come back with a revised plan for the land alterations in the lakeshore yard. That application was tabled. The Planning Commission did act on the application for the hardcover Variances." Mr. Downey noted that the resolution states that the front entry will be 11' x 6' which is incorrect. It will be a 19' x 6' addition. Mabusth agreed that the resolution was incorrect and should read 19' x 61. Goetten stated that she would prefer to see hardcover, other than landscaping plastic, removed as a means of reducing hardcover. She suggested portions of welkway could be removed to bring hardcover to 45• as originally approved. Callahan asked how much hardcover will be added by the land alteration project. Mabusth replied, "It is difficult to determine at this point. The specific areas where erosion exists are located in the 75-250' setback area, and if retaining walls are to be installed, additional hardcover must be approvv� is that area." Goetten said, "I believe this is why we asked to look at this property from a comprehensive view point." Callahan concurred ',ith Goetten that the applications should ' not be separated. Mr. Downey said, "we are talking about hardcover in two I separate areas. I don't believe that the Planning Commission is going to approve anything that is excessive. The Planning - 13 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 ZONING FILE i1493-DONNEY CONTINUED Commission understood that I have been trying to do this addition since January. I have tried to work with the City in any way possible. I am taking 480 s.f. of driveway away, which is more than just landscaping plastic. The retaining wall work cannot be done until spring. The erosion problem stems from a project done on the neighboring property which the City of Orono approved." It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to accept the Planning Commission's recommendation which includes the payment of a double fee. Motion, Ayes-2, Callahan, Goetten, and Peterson, Nay. Motion failed. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Peterson, to table the Hardcover Variance for a front entry addition until such time that the Conditional Use Permit application is presented for action. Motion, Ayes-4, Mayor Grabek, Nay. Motion passed. #1550 GERALD NELSON 1629 BOHNS POINT ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION ►2866• It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Callahan, to adopt Resolution #2866, granting a Hardcover Variance to construct a closet addition at 1629 Bohns Point Road. Motion, Ayes-5. Nays-0. Motion passed. #1561 CHRISTINE BECK 3820 CHERRY AVENUE VARIANCE RESOLUTION i2867 Mrs. Beck and her son were present. Bernhardson reviewed the information perta,ning to this application (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated July 12, 1990), and noted that the Planning Commission had recommended approval. Mabusth, using a sketch plan, showed the location of the deck addition and the 4" encroachment into the lakeshore setback area. It was moved by Mayor Grabek. seconded by Callahan, to adopt Resolution t2867, granting a lakeshore setback Variance and hardcover Variance to construct a deck at 3820 Cherry Avenue. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. ♦1572 GUENTHER AND GERTRUD NOELTING 1060 TONKANA ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE RESOLUTION i2868 Mr. and Mrs. Noelting were present with their Architect, Mr. Neil Weber. - 14 - APPLICATION NO. 1493 6 1570 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 3/12/91 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Chuck Downey COPIES: 2665 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 --------------------------"------"'---------------------------------------- TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance/Conditional Use Permit --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 3/11/91 VOTE: 3 For 2 Against --------------------------------------------------------------------------- COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: Tc approve per the findings and conditions of the resolution previously sent to you. All persons with an interest in the property must sign the resolutions. Please notify us if Mrs. Downey should also sign the original resolutions at the City offices. Variance Approval is limited to the extent shown on approved plan and as noted in the approval resolution (Page 6A). Changes in approved plans are subject to further review by the City. Variance approval expires one year :.fter date of approval. Building permit application must be submitted no later than March 11, 1992. Ii you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. µI e To: Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator Prop: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building a Zoning Administrator Date: November 19, 1992 Subject: #1493/1570 Chuck Downey, 2665 Casco Point Road - Clarification of Council Directives - Resolution No. 2934 In March of 1991 Council approved Resolution No. 2934 which granted approval of land alterations within the 0-75' setback area consisting of two tiers of retaining wall. The variance portion of the application consisted of an after -the -fact average lakeshore setback variance for a lakeside deck constructed sometime in 1982 without the benefit of a building permit. A hardcover variance was also needed for a 6' x 19' addition to be installed at the street side of the existing-esidence. The applicant has obtained the permit for the lakeside deck but does not plan to proceed with the structural addition or the land alteration improvements. Please refer to Exhibit A. Applicant advises that the house is being sold and if hardcover removals called for in Resolution No. 2934 are required, Downey will loose the potential sale. Mr. Downey was advised by staff t t Resolution No. 2934 did not specify that hardcover removals were just conditioned on new construction. Although the lakside deck may have not resulted in additional hardcover, the improvement did involve structural intensification where hardcover excesses exist. In 1982, at the time the deck was installed, the intensification of structure was not an issue. Mr. Downey has asked that Council provide clarification on this matter. Review of Application 41493 and 1570 In 1982 applicant received approval of a setback variance for a proposed detached garage. Hardcover at that time was approved at 45% with the 75-250' setback area. In the current review, hardcover in the 75-250' setback area was found to be at 59.94%. Much of the additional hardcover resulted from the following (refer to Exhibit D): 561.8 s.f. or 6.7% of landscape area underlain with plastic. In 1982 the City did not include these areas as hardcover. 480 s.f. or 5.7% of expanded gravel/paved parking area adjacent to entrance drive to garage. In the 1982 review applicant was advised to provide a back out apron. The City Engineer advised in the recent review that because of the proximity of Casco Point Road, the expanded area cannot function as a back out but does provide off-street parking. Zoning Files #1493/1570 November 19, 1992 Page 2 3. Other additions in hardcover resulted from the installation of paved walkways, stone retaining wall not included in original hardcover, etc. Options of Action To approve applicant's request and require no additional removals of hardcover, OR As lakeside deck is located within the 75-250' setback area and involves a structural intensification where severe excesses exist, require that hardcover be reduced 12.3% resulting in a total of 3,967.8 s.f, or 47.6% per Resolution No. 2934, Exhibit 8, OR Refer applicant's request to Planning Commission for further consideration. This will have an impact on applicant's potential sale as the next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for January of 1993. lsv 1=2 November 6, 1992 To: Orono City Council In regard to the Resolution of the City Council #2934, I'm asking that the Council review the matter of the After -The -Fact Variance for the deck. I've decided not to proceed with the planned addition and lakeside retaining walls for which there was Hardcover Removal Requirements. In fact, we've sold the property with a December 18th closing date. It was my understanding that the Hardcover Removal pertained only to the proposed addition and not to the existing deck. I understand that I would be required to pay a double permit fee for an After - The -Fact Variance on the deck. I would ask Council to please clarify this matter. If the Hardcover Removal Requirements have to be met for the deck only, the buyer will not proceed with the purchase of my home. ((s/iy�ncerely,_ a k�,Dow/neJ 2665 Casco Point Road �j Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 5802599 04 O4,O a n F t9kESH0�� CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2934 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL BOILING CODE SECTIONS 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1, SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8 AND GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 PILES 01493 AND #1570 WHEREAS, Chuck Downey (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 2665 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 136, Spring Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for an after -the -fact variance to Municipal Boning Code Section 10.22 Subd. 1, to permit a deck constructed in front of the average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is allowed and per Section 10.22 Subd. 2 seeks approval of hardcover variances within the 0-75' setback area for the installation of retaining walls at approximately 58' in length and the installation of access stairs resulting in a net reduction of hardcover of 66.3 s.f. or 1.471 (final hardcover 0-75' - 652.9 s.f. or 14.51) and seeks approval of a hardcover variance within the 75-250' setback area for a 6' x 19' entry addition resulting in 114 s.f. of structural hardcover resulting in a net reduction of 1,022.3 s.f. or 12.3% (final hardcover 75-250' - 3,967.8 s.f. or 47.6%) and grants a variance per Section 10.55 Subd. 8 and a conditional use permit per Section 10.03 Subd. 19 that would allow land alterations involving retaining walls within the Lakeshore protected area where no such alterations or structures are allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: Page 1 of 6 oVMOA' 'kE9H04 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2934 1. These applications were reviewed as Zoning Files 41493 and 11570. 2. The property is located in the LR-lC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 21,780 s.f. or 1/2 acre in area. The property consists of 12,850 s.f. or .29 acres. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed these applications on February 20, 1990, March 19, 1990, August 20, 1990 and January 22, 1991 and recommended approval of the proposed variances and conditional use permit based upon the following findings: Hardcover variances a. Excessive hardcover resulted from landscaped areas underlain with plastic that was not considered hardcover at the time a 1982 survey was completed. b. Applicant was advised in an earlier 1982 variance review to maintain gravel drive area to assist in backout maneuvering from garage. C. Hardcover will be reduced 66.3 s.f. or 1.47• in the 0- 75' setback area and 1,022.3 s.f. or 12.3% in the 75-250' setback area. After -the -fact average lakeshore setback variance a. Current neora on a acent properties ad submitted letters noting no problem with location of second story existing lakeshore deck. b. Second story deck provides no visual impact or interference with lakeshore views for residences on either side because of sloping lakeshore topographies. Page 2 of 6 �t9kesllo�wo CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2934 Conditional Use Perm for land alterations a. Proposed land alteret and installation o retaining walls will stabilize the steep lakeshore banks and prevent further erosion. b. The stability of an existing boathouse will be secured and minimize erosion of adjacent lakeside bank. 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 properties; 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 appli- cant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow retaining walls within the lakeshore yard will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. 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 variances and conditional use permit on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 3 of 6 04 0 �O a F CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL t9kE3H04� NO. 2934 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants an after -the -fact variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22 Subd. 1 for a lakeside deck and per Section 10.22 Subd. 2 approves hardcover variances within the 0- 75' setback area and the 75-250' setback area that would permit an entry addition, retaining walls and installation of access stairs within the lakeshore protected area and per Section 10.03 Subd. 19 and Section 10.55 Subd. 8 grants a conditional use permit and variance for the installation of retaining walls within the lakeshore protected area. Such approvals are subject to the following conditions: 1. All hardcover removals within the 0-75' and 75-250' setback areas are to be completed prior to footing inspections for new construction by the Orono Building Department. Existing hardcover areas scheduled for removal are shown on survey/site plan and attached as Page 6A of this resolution. 2. Applicant to fil, for an after-the-fact/penalty building permit for second story lakeside deck constructed sometime in 1982. The City will require penalty fee payment upon issuance of building permit. 3. A typical section of retaining wall shall be strengthened by including a lower row of deadman offset from the top row at 8' on center. 4. Applicant shall be required to provide erosion control fence between the work areas and the lake. Such erosion control to be established prior to any land alteration. 5. Applicant is placed on notice that the upper wall section may channelize water and create further erosion problems. Applicant is responsible for the repair and maintenance of this retaining wall and any land areas disturbed by further erosion in order to protect quality of run-off into Lake Minnetonka. Page 4 of 6 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2934 6. 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 within one year of the date of Council approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (March 11, 1992). 7. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation ..f the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. S. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this llth day of March, 1991. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Stitt 'z"df . ' T STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) as. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this llth day of March, 1991, by Barbara A. Peterson i Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor L City Cle-k of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporati,n and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. W _"A L NAAa Is:: s+ naYa - wncw,� EMmyny M�uc W Notary Public Page 5 of 6 040�O 'kE8H0tti STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2934 On this /,:D� day of /Ynr / , 199/ before me a Notpary Publiq within and 'for said c�ounty, personally appeared /in 11n n f (6P4Z /�"Wni� rn/i✓✓�yknown to me to be the person(s) des _ibed and wnv executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this �+ day of 199, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PURL MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 6 of 6 at Y n ew rid` i / � em;,f.•�9 .rd e � a Il • •ae. e• .,m, j s' p R. / ' _ .� fie l =f 'Ms d >4D G4tae fl *u �. '••110af10 Na .em P Ch legal Description Z +: 1ta�• �f R.a /eCFry�yC Lot 136, Spring Park R �` he This survey snows the location Of all existing buildings and risible 'hardcover" In relation t0 the boundaries of the above described property. It does not purport to Show any other improvements or encroachments. Date : 9-2-82,5-16-90 far. I--- ^a' I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or Scale: I- • 20• under my direct supervision and that I am a duly rapist - Iron marker found Bred land surveyor under the laws Of the State Of Minne- 0 iron marker set sota. Bearings shown are to an COFFIN a GRONBERG, INC. assumed datum. ��l��y-�i von erg n. P1TMs —�—: i•.r•.•/••w/••' Engineers, fend Surveyors, Planners tong lake. Minnesota_ RESOLUTION 02934 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) CITY OF ORONO ) I Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do h!reby 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 March 11 , 1991 . and that the same is a true and correct copy of said resolution was duly adopted by said City Council at said meeting. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 15th day of March 19 91 (SEAL) 1�7 ! 1391 7. fr CITY OF ORONO LAND USE FILING INFORMATION Prepared By: Mary H ro, Secretary to Nancy E. Husnik, Legal Assistant Popham, Haik, Schnobrich S Kaufman, Ltd. August 13, 1991 The following is a recap of the resolutions submitted to this office which have been filed with the Hennepin County Recorder's Office. The resolutions are enclosed. RESOLUTION NUMBER APPLICANT'S NAME DATE FILED DOCUMENT NUMBER 2898 (encl.) Everson, Garry and Marie 05-03-91 5774534(A) 2973 (encl.) Swanson, Keith and Nola 07-17-91 5802593(A) 2972 (encl.) Ferril, Eleanor 07-17-91 5802594(A) 2950 (encl.) Olson, Donald 07-17-91 5802595(A) 2949 (encl.) Hardin, F. John 07-17-91 5802596(A) 2954 (encl.) Maus, James and Joan 07-17-91 5802597(A) 2934 (encl.) Downey, Chuck 07-17-91 5802599(A) 2957 (encl.) Richardson, Keenan 07-17-91 5802600(A) 2961 (encl.) Craigbank Associates 07-18-91 5802775(A) 2951 (encl.) Finney, Sara and Mark 07-17-91 2188319(T) 2953 (encl.) Smith's Bay Marina, Inc. 07-17-91 2188320(T) Resolutions 2951 and 2953 are copies of the original Resolutions that were submitted for filing in the Registrar's office. Since these resolutions were torrens, the originals are kept at the Registrar's office, but we submitted a copy with the filing to get the filing information stamped on it for your file. The following resolution has been submitted for filing but as of this writing, we do not have the filing information: 1. Resolution 2971 (Gary Mroz and Kenneth Hopkins) Also enclosed are the following Resolutions which were submitted for filing but because they are torrens, they aie not accepted for filing: 1. Resolution No. 2966 (Marsh at Lafayette) - will not accept a resolution approving a plat. Resolution No. 2960 (Tim and Beth Traff) - will not accept variance resolutions if torrens. However, we noticed that they did accept Resolution No. 2951 which is a variance resolution that is torrens. We do have two other variance resolutions that are torrens. We have sent a letter to you on July 30, 1991 requesting that we needed the Certificates of Titles before the filing can be done. If you do not want to proceed with obtaining the certificates of title please let us know and we will return the original resolutions to you. If you would like to try to have these resolutions filed, please obtain the Certificates of Title as requested in our letter of July 30, 1991 and we will have Metro Legal try to get them filed on the respective Certificates. 35NEH HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' (ED 250-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE - ------------------------ A. HOUSE fo3 X 36./ _ lYS Y.A S.F. LENGTH WIDTH X X % = S.F. X = S.F. 9. GARAGE 26.2 x 2Y.2 = 63Y.0 S.F. y�1I' CF nP C. DRIVEWAY X = ps S.F. X = S.F. D.. SIDEWALK x 3. s = 63 S.F. /D/ X ?f x 2.9 = /o6.Y S.F. 6 fwe- x 6 36 AGe# wftc --3, % / _ 12 0 S. F. E. BECK ATIO/ 0, x YO PAr//i X = 315 S.F. OPt't • • 32.5 F.LANDSCAPE 8J* X /. / = 96 .Y S.F. AREAS Z 6 5 UNDERLAIN 9Y x - — - Z O o S.F. PLASTIC SHEETING % - S.F. p //M BF.. ArKJ • 6 X (/. T 7'7 X = S.F. G. OTHER X / c 36 S.F. Cnrrlq TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE - TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE V?'W./ S.F. ❑A F325 S.F. ED O X 100 = 59. 9`/ /o Q � tea• .. // ' '�+' . .0 �e •I',, Q rr°raa 4�• iQ� R�rf,p 44 E � / •y >.� n �A itLegif al 6, Springon f e d Lot 136, Spring Park 6 This survey shows the location ;:f all e%i sting buildings and visible "hardcover" in relation to the boundaries of the above described property. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. Date : 9-7-82,5-16-90 rev. 1 hereby certify that this survey was prepared me or Scale: 1I.,. 20' �'�,;,^a ; under my direct supervision and that Iama dulyyregist. • Iron marker found ered land surveyor under the laws of the State of Ninne. o Iron marker set 5ota. Bearings shown are to an COFFIN a GRONBERG, INC. assumed datum. �.—:/..>�>./a..f... arA�j. Gr4g.ic. o�T1� ��: ��„ra v..•i Engineers, Land Surveyors, Planners Long Lake, MI nnesota 90 Y - . i zz EKISfala w 9 oro9Q V 8 ` Kq R a � This survey Shows the location �f all existing buildings and vls l Dle "hardCOver" In re l at ton [0 thQ Dounda rl e5 of the above described property. It does not purport to show any other Improvements or enCraachnents, 1 hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly regist- ered land surveyor under the laws Of the State of Minne- sota. COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC... Engineers, Land Surveyors, Planners long Lake, Minnesota MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992 ZONING FILE #1767 - CONT. It was moved by Goat ten, seconded by Butler, to adopt Resolution #3202 for Application •1767 for George and Theresa Bloom, 1374 Rest Point Road, approving variances to construct a detached garage. Ayes 5, nays 0. Callahan said the proper administrative procedure would have permitted the Planning Commission to act on the information available before it came to the Council fo, review. (05) 01773 ROBERT KOEHNEN, 537 HANLON AVENUE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION •3203 Robert Koehnen was present. Mabusth explained this application is to allow the rebuilding of an existing detached garage that does not meet the required side or rear setbacks. The applicant has replaced the retaining walls at the rear of the property with a boulder wall, approximately 7- 8' in height. The City Engineer suggests that the City not address the boulder wall with regard to it structurally supporting the bank. The applicant has provided the City with a letter from the neighbor to the north approving the wall as it was installed. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Petersor„ to adopt Resolution 43203 for Application 01773 for Robert Koehnen, 537 Hanlon Avenue, approving variances for the reconstruction Of the detached garage and land alterations. Ayes 5, nays 0. (06) •1493 a #1570 CHUCK DOWNEY, 3665 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CLARIFICATION OF COUNCIL DIRECTION Chuck Downey was present 4 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 23, 1992 ZONING FILES 01493 i 1570 - CONT. Mabusth explained, per a recent letter from Mr. Downey that he Is not proceeding with the structural improvements. In 1982 the City granted approval of setback variances for the Installation of a detached garage and hardcover in the 75-250' setback area was approved at 45%. In the current hardcover inventory, hardcover was shown at 59% due to a change In policy regarding the calculation of hardcover. During the 1982 review it was suggested that the applicant provide a back -out apron. During the most current review, the City Engineer advised that the apron could not function properly because of the location of Casco Point Road. The applicant has obtained a permit for the deck. The applicant questions the need to now remove the hardcover scheduled for removal per the approval resolution. Butler clarified that the hardcover removals were scheduled to off- set the additional construction, which has not happened. She felt If the construction does not occur, the hardcover scheduled for removal can remain. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Butler, to direct staff with regard to Applications 01493 and 01570 for Chuck Downey of 2665 Casco Point Road to not require the hardcover removals on the property provided a building permit is not Issued for additional construction. Ayes 5, nays 0. (07) LICENSE DENIAL - GAVLES MARINA - RESOLUTION #3204 Jabbour abstained from discussion of this Item. Gaffron stated the City Attorney has suggested changes to the draft resolution deleting reference to the number of slips allowed, as the code does not directly address this Issue and It should not be a reason for denial of a license. Butler asked If a judge would laugh at the City because of the lack of past enforcemont of the licensing requirement. Barrett felt the City has decided to now proceed formally with the license requirement. He noted the resolution does not suggest denial of the license due to past history of the property. Callahan suggested deletion of the paragraph beginning with "further be It resolved". Barrett felt that would be appropriate and did not feel It necessary to wait until December 31st to take action. 5 APPLICATION ED. 1493 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 12/2/92 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Chuck Downey COPIES: 2665 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 --------------.--------------_---------------------------------------------- TYPE OF APPLICATION: Request to Clarify Directives of Council Resolution f2934 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: November 23, 1992 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against --------------------------------------------------------------------------- COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: Council concurred that since it was not your intention to proceed with the proposed structural improvements to your property that the hardcover removals required in Resolution 42934 were not necessary. You have obtained the required building permit for the lakeside deck constructed some time in 1982. As you have advised, your residence property will be sold within the next month. You should advise the prospective buyer of the hardcover excesses within the 75-250' setback area now at 59.9% (allowed 25%). The buyer should be advised that any proposed structural improvements to the property will require variance approval and the eventual removal of existing hardcover. If you desire certified copies of the official council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder or City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. Please contact my office if you have any further questions. ch L vs area �k'oPai.4-Z 'To DP& S?dTT 5 2 rev►sc, sTp-rr c-sr sy -s t�14 s xo qso 6,� 3 7 y6A 13.5 cs Nc . I tG 4�Y 6 YY �.. ryz t4T 0P — -7% 6>7st, /TfrPuVt:� ETR'PF" Ll -(" `ojj-c rK A-r 14/5� /0 . NC) C-0Aj-Ge /N O --7s ' ��NO"" - ST-t c! 5 No 3 1 0 . -.) S - - r l ca c 4 S-0 0 Z.4. . O X AT PAA-'L L#OR -7S• 2so' _ 18tbr(op a 8Z'aO r Zr. 2-0')0 s e w ep EivYr! N G 0-�r 9301-No-,,Pr ' 12.Z6/. %5'2sbr Ss5s &o P,e�•to - 0 S 1 D¢r,4aye S - VS.2 q + yG de %-en- W nLs- = 06,q •r /'V�� rr�r- /tirr. -a vt7z+r--y /tX pAeP'60?e21', �2�go Corltl'lrnt.. of Surrey !or 1'. Chnrlan Ihtney tti~of Let I)C, Sprine Park Ilontw pin County, Mn-msoto rMre' . ' ".: , 417. Itot $ ill .sa IwA...a.l,.•,aw� I horeLy cortlt'y thnt ticl+ Ir n Irtm - atal corrart raprenenL Mn-i rt' a rurvny, of th? I.ntolnrlrn or Lot IY,, ShrinC Dirk, t4^ lrnl.lnn of oll ednUnr, bull•11nfu thureor, and tho prolmsed locatlnn 4 n prolonpl h..11.•fl .r. Sesldt IN c 3111 Date t 9-7-82 G' o • t Iron anrkor r G_1<lun R. Cumin SeR o: 4 L•tnd Surveyor and Plenum: Innl; Lnks, I;Inmaotft (ZeMu�,¢ y Y�i 3uS6e�� Ti �J I\ yKU RLSTrw(� G 5m er.. lww;�/:. lEr:r? ire Tij. Esuz>`i 9"°9e 1 to d''Gf �4 ~�� Le,e! gesc•p:! n � ,le se . $pfl ng is rk R inla Svr Y!!' annMs the IpCtil pf. Of 2 1i anp nslolP hardcover' rela L on to ex: sting oui loin,, nne apove 0@,Cr1010 pr00er I[ p0. the OOvnOarles pf any other In aroveoen:s or encroacnnent not purppr; :p snOv get* 9-)-g2, S-:6-90 rrv. ^V+as. Scale: I• RO• "�"' I nereoy cartit r that this survey • Iron grter, f.pn0 / urger a was prepared by oe or err' lane ivrve orpervlsi0n an0 :na: ! am a duly p : iron marker sex sore. y under the lees pt :ne re915:- ,Late or gist_ gprl nqs Shown he. are to an assVmeO Oatr. COFFIN g GROWING. INC. frr-: r:w sr.� %�-:MM++.v En If f�P 9 Lire, Lana smrteprf. IluLery Long Like. Ml onefea _ a :'A.IAT rY I y levc,flcate 0`. Survey 1 fora. cherles OOuney wf Pf Lot 136. Swing Perk MI.,eslA Coast, Nl h"Sota '' O XI / / I aSr• � a'Dgy r • P.. i 10 J. yr°Fsye d at' .x 0 uke H v F Legal O!S<r(pLIOn Q Lot 136. Spring Park V In,, survey snow the lacatlan of all eFI5t10g buildings ane v1.. a'. 'Ta recover" :n fP13Ll On 10 ',-a b0iinar,ea Of :he above described property. :t does n0: perP.,t t0 show any ocher l.prav emints of eac-iocniseatt. Date 94-62's-16-90 res. I "repy, certify that this survey was prepar" by !e or Scale: pods 2Y direct appervssloe add that 1 ad a duly fptat- • Iron utter /Dub Ve0 land SpneFar w*der t" Ines of ;hie State Of Kim"- 0 lroe carter set seta. Bearings Shown are to an COFFIN 6 6NONaE0.6. INC. assuued dsta.. ";,fay •-/ liar On erg Tc�f0. r2m r•n••n/rrr Engineers, Land Surveyors. Planners i r�r.w�... f•� Long Lake. Nlnuseta amhu- N. + EF.w.r i�-i... _ y...t .•.—••.. �� %a:.i + ,iw. - — K.rr lii') J+n ie Certificate of Survey for P. Charien Do•ney of L-t 196, Spring Fork flame l:7r County, NLmneoba y+aa• a ri• M.. 'ast f.v . r . i i' IIMC N. Y.. mil_ 11�L, � _ /Typo lk COVE ..y,� __^` a:lewJ ;• n sa6 I SL ti LIS iL �._-_ y _ f is•t5oi»! xlbxk e...e ar.ea. . y )Soot ++�� /I. la.dterer l: ni:.ull — -- e / 714re y s 4M. IuM .-ce le,itl:..0 7a 4 7g7y +z7 1,m.c1 lAPeeedladi ie... I hereby rertiry that tld � i r n l rain and correct ropreaentnttrnl or a Porvrp oi' the l.,uadsri-rs of Lot 135t Spring Park, tar lontinn of all ertatlwg Mlail•I:4aFs Lherear., and :ha pr•apmsed location of a Iso{or..e•1 b,il.•. inr. We Scald: 10 Date : 9-7-27 r f- o - : Iron an. ke, .� Cordon R. Coffin Reg/ Load Swwayor aad Pianwer_ ' f ow L" n11, Rianaewota k. 60?121a> 12'ISr0 Cerltflente of Survey for 1'. Chnrlca Do:ney .'. Al of Irt 13f, Spr1nP Perk flonle-pin County, Ilinnneote Leeye• ,r LpyNhbsr �f;�.I. 'A^I . • dE.:, l: ` G::'�.' pE. A. her ♦ I�" t,, rlrvae � ,". �k :�:�•. '. `: rand �� /see. y rl !+•.ke.x.k.r.l:q) - v RS Mrd..rerlenJ:ry� ... LW! s,n ;n,•mr�xagn,.,aedd,len. sxrax...1,..R«al I IaereL•y rartl"y that t1d+ Ir It trim and corrant reprenenLit.l.n nr n rorvay of thj Lmnelnrira of Lot M, Sprier, Pork, Ph lnntinn of nll axlntivg 14,11,11nEs Lhoreor., and the proposed locatIon of a In-olor..ea L•ail.•�inr. WJH „ r Scale: P' = 30r ,,tF�/�� C,�rdan R. Coffin Reg o. 6064 Dote : 9-7-87 (,'/` L'md Savveyor and Planner 0 1 Iron mrker 7 InnC Wm, l.Innesatn 1 / i rr r riy i wav O`u� jo Am, 1 • / Q� + /a<• v .Wzww y ry /i / �v Ekir,'in9 fmi°fi � e r es n �st a q in 4 µa4 d, Legal Description 2 n Lot 136. Spring Park if •• '`�-�- / This survey snows :ne location .' a:I existing buildings 4n0 vlsiOl! "na roCOver" in re:al:.h to the boundaries of / the above d•scn bed property. It does not purport to no. / any diner .mprovements or en<roacnments. Date i 9-7-82.5-16-90 rev, �-arn^ 1 hereby certify that this surrey was prepared by me or Scale: I' BO' under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly regist- Iron marker found ered land surveyor under the laws of the State Of Minne- 0 iron and rklr set sots. Been ngs shown are to an COFFIN B GRONBERG, INC. assumed datum. _.g {y - 757 - ."j" Engineers, Land Surveyors, Planners �•^",�^""'...r Long Lake, Minnesota City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COI NO. A ABSOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 i 2 FILE 1493 WHEREAS, Chuck Downey (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 2665 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as Lot 136, Spring Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (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 to permit a deck constructed in front of the average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is allowed and per Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 seeks approval of hardcover variances within the 75-250' setback area for a proposed 19' x 6' entry addition resulting in 114 s.f. of structural hardcover w; re there already exists 4,990.1 s.f. or 59.94% of hardcover within the 75-250' setback area where only 25% is alloMPd. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 1493. 2. The property is located in the LR-lC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 21,780 s.f. or 1/2 acre in area. The property consists of 12,850 s.f. or .29 acres. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 20, 1990 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: Hardcover 75-230' A) Excessive hardcover results from landscaped areas underlain with plastic that was not considered hardcover at the time a 1982 survey was completed. Page 1 of 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. B) Applicant was advised in an earlier 1982 variance review to maintain gravel off-street parking area as to assist in on -site turnaround for maneuvering out of garage. After -the -Fact Average Lakeshore Setback Variance A) Current neighbors on adjacent properties have submitted letters noting no problem with location of second story existing lakeshore deck. B) second story deck provides no visual impact or interference with lakeshore views for residences on either side because of sloping lakeshore topographies. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the sp2 tit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of c:e City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants an after -the -fact variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and per Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 grants aproval of a hardcover variance to permit an entry addition adding 114 s.f. of structural hardcover within the 75-250' setback area that already contains excessive amounts of hardcover. Approval is subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1. All hardcover removals in the 75-250' setback area are to be completed prior to footing inspection by the Orono Building Department for new construction. Existing hardcover areas scheduled for removal are shown on survey and attached as Page 6 of this resolution. The hardcover removals are as follows: A. 361.8 s.f. of landscaped area underlain with plastic to east side or street side of house. b. 200 s.f. of landscaped area underlain with plastic on south side of house. C. 480 s.f. of gravel off-street parking area adjacent to Casco Point Road. 2. Applicant to file for an after-the-fact/penalty building permit for second story lakeside deck constructed sometime in 1982. The City will require penalty fee payment upon issuance of building permit. 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 within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 10, 1991). 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 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. Page 3 of 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION Of THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Adopted by the City Council of the City of 0.ono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 10th day of September, 1990. ATTEST - Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA 1 ) as. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this loth day of September, 1990 by James R. Grabek 6 Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor i City Clerk of the City of Orono, - Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 4 of 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO, TE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 6 of 6 N� ayuo{wui�y ��07 1 i �44 n n e _ qv 16 XI f` PX�¢7�7H6. 71a�u cobro<: sse.ItiO% sf.. . .....u'7C p$ !!�. ..w:.. 21. V. Paqe 6 of 6 :d i; city of ORONO CITY RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF r4U. It • A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 FILE i1493 WHEREAS, Chuck Downey (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 2665 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as ..ot 136, Spring Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit the construction of a 61xl9' entry addition to the east or street side of the existing residence requiring approval of excessive hardcover within the 75-250' setback area where 4,516 s.f, or 54% exists. The applicant proposes a reduction of hardcover within the 75-250' setback area of 787 s.f., with final hardcover at 3,759 s.f. or 458. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 41493. 2. The property is located in the LR-1C Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District roquiring 21,780 s.f. or 1/2 acre in area. The property consists of 12,850 s.f. or .29 acres. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on February 20, 1990 and March 19, 1990 and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: A) Applicant shall maintain hardcover at level approved in 1982 at 458. B) Entry will provide a wind break and shelter from inclement weather. Page 1 of 5 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL • NO. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are pec-liar 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 +s a convenience to the t.aypdicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit the construction of a 61x19' entry addition to the east/street side of the existing residence located at 2665 Casco Point Road, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall remove 787 square feet of existing hardcover as depicted on site plan included as Page 5 of this resolution. All hardcover scheduled for removal shall be completed at the time of the footing inspection by the Orono Building Inspector. 2. Applicant is hereby advised that hardcover within the 75-250' setback area of this property must be maintained at final approved level of 3,759 square feet or 45% and that any proposed improvements to ts,is property that result in increases in hardcover must be matched with equal or greater removals of existing hardcover. 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 within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (April 9, 1991). Page 2 of 5 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL • NO. 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 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 9th day of April, 1990. Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) as. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of April, 1990 by James R. Grabek a Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor a City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My C.mmissivt, Expires rac,_ 3 of 5 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. as. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary P�I-c within and for said county, persona l appeared known to me to be the person s described n and who executedt e foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 4 of 5 Crrltricetc of S,rvey for 1'. Charles Uau,ey of Irt 13L. Spr1nr Perk Ilcnmlpin County, lunntao.a cor is'obo. .*��4=SJ.i� NAlwrda.r[rl<r:[1.yj .- 7 ply +sitt,./J1....,1�.wp,.A1 v`•adl... I hsreLy rortlry that Lid % I^ a Iruv and cormct. ropreaenLsl.io•, rr a n,rmf ,I' the Lmdi. r{ra of Lot 134, Spring rork, Uw lnnlien nl all ezlnl.ing Lnl ldinFa Lhurenc, and the proposed lecetfe„ !d a prolorc•I I?dl•'Inf• OF Seale, la - Ce4 , 9-9-87 o - 1 Iron marker «. Y , Q,rd n R. Coffin Res 6064 Lind Surveyor end Planner; �• War. L,Ya, I'd"vota j.N J (S2)ZONING FILE #1570-CHUCK DOWNEY 2665 CASCO POINT ROAD CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING -CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Chuck Downey was present. 1Vy v r� 2 Kelley re -opened the Public Hearing on this matter at 8:10 p.m., and asked Mabusth to present the information pertaining to Mr. Downey's application. hT Mabusth stated that Staff met with Mr. Downey en- the jr,.41 pCrz'Y'to discuss alternatives to the tiers of retaining walls, which were too intense and did not fully address the drainage problem. She said, "Mr. Downey is now proposing to construct a 25 lineal foot retaining wall with a height of three to three and a half feet. The wall will channel drainage along the lot line pjere it will then fan out toward the lake. in order to preserve RW treed and existing boathouse in the lakeshore yard �a,. retaining wall approximately 58 feet in length, and four4eet� t- high would be constructed. The City Engineer has requested that additional 'deadmen' be added to the installation of the wall to provide more support. Mr. Downey also intends to remove the existing steps and replace them with cement pads that are three feet wide and would be trimmed with timbers. Hardcover within the 0-75' and 75-250' setback areas would be reduced." There were no public comments regarding this matter and Kelley closed the Public Hearing at 8:17 p.m. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Hanson, to recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of retaining walls at 2665 Casco Point Road. Moos asked if it will be necessary to screen the retaining walls from the lake. Mabusth stated that due to the height and location of the walls, screening would not be needed. She said, "Staff -has pointed out W. the need for Mr. Downey to maintain the'dupper aining wall If erosion does occur, he should come back to the City. Motion. Ayes-6, Nays-0. Motion passed. (Ir Y (i3)ZONING FILE 11609-ALICE BROCK 2780 CHHEARING ROAD PUBLIC HEARING -AFTER -THE -FACT AND PROPOSED VARIANCES Alice Brock was present. Kelley opened the Public Hearing at 8:20 p.m., and asked Mabusth to provide a review of the application. ` Mabuste, asked if the Planning Commission members were able 5, to view this property prior to the snow storm. The Planning Commission members indicated that they had not seen the property without the additional snow. Mabusth said, "Staff went out to the site to look at the - 9 - UAIVh U landscape area he plastic has deteriorated to a point where I would not consider it �.i�'P"hardcover. Council, at their February llth meeting, conceptually introduced a policy whereby landscape plastic within the 0-75' setback area can no longer be traded for structural hardcover, and must be removed entirely. It is my understanding that if plastic is locatsd in Is 75-250' or 250-500' setback areas and hardcover exceeds the allowed percentages for those areas, the excess must be approved or removed, and cannot be traded for structural hardcover." Bellows asked if the deck stairs are included in the deck measurements. Mabusth replied, "The stairs are included in the hardcover calculations." Ms. Brock stated that the catwalk was included in the contractor's plans. She said, "The contractor is now bankrupt and cannot be located. Tne extension of the deck was planned specifically so that a catwalk could be extended to the back bedroom and provide an exit. The only exit I have from the top level of my split-level home is from the deck doors at the front of the house. Those doors are currently frozen shut." Mabusth added, "The applicant is concerned that she would have no way out of the house should a fire start and come up the main stairway, located in the middle of the house." Bellows stated that Ms. Brock's home is no different than any two story home and that the Building Code requires bedroom windows to be a minimum size to provide egress in the event of a fire. Mabusth stated that the issue of eves was hardcover enters into this application because the catwalk would be located below the four foot eaves. Mabusth also stated that the e�v��a werf not included in the hardcover calculations. She said,""`6ri ginally, iEres— thought that there would be no increase in hardcover resulting from the catwalk.(,'� •t LPL -t-a�^ �'�`-•.�.i Ms. Brock stated that she had tried to hire reputable contractors that had worked in the Orono area. She said, "I was surprised when I received the letter from the City. The letter came when the deck had been completed and work was about to begin on the catwalk. I would like to have the catwalk. The master bedroom and bathroom, my office and another bedroom are all in the back half of the house. I am concerned about being able to get out of the house." Kelley asked Ms. Brock if she had the same concerns when she considered buying the house. Ms. Brock replied, "Yes, I was concerned about an additional exit when I bought the house. I would also like to say that I do - 10 - L; i j `� U not believe the deck is hardcover. I believe that the concrete slab below is hardcover. I also •io not understaid how the catwalk, which fits entirely under the eaves, world be considered as hardcover. The catwalk will not interfere v•ith runoff in any manner. There is a gutter on the eave." Cohen stated that he would recommend approval cf Ms. Brock's proposal provided hardcover remains at 30.4%. Hanson concurred with Cohen. Kelley said. "I would approve the deck. I am not in favor of the catwalk. If the applicant wishes to remove plastic to maintain the 30.4% and keep the deck, that is one thing. I am not going to allow additional plastic to be removed so that the catwalk can also be constructed. I would allow the applicant to have a door and stairway to address her exit concerns." Hanson asked Ms. Brock if she would prefer to have the Planning Commission table her application. cis. Brock stated that this problem has been causing her grief since it began and she wanted to resolve it. There were no public comments on this application, with the exception of a letter dated November 17, 1990, from Ken Roelofs, and Kelley closed the Public Hearing at 8:30 p.m. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to recommend approval of the after -the -fact hardcover Variance, provided e� t hardcover within the 75-250' zone does not excead 30 �i4. his /u t��, applies only to the deck. It is further recommended that Council �„ ICJ deny the Variance requested for the catwalk, based on a lack of 3c�r7 hardship. Motion, Ayes-4, Rowlette and Moos, Nay. Moos and Rowlette did not believe that the catwalk would interfere with runoff and that it complies with the intent of the Hardcover Ordinance. Kelley added that if the applicant wishes to propose n p an showing a stairwayl that she would need to bring that back for Planning Commission's consideration. — tb uwti- �. ofame---J [J� (E4)ZONING FILE #1621-TERRY a JONELL JOHNSON 1045 LINDEN LANE PUBLIC HEARING -VARIANCES Terry Johnson was present. Kelley opened the Public Hearing at 8:38 p.m. and asked Gaffron to make his opening comments. Ga.fron summarized the issues pertaining to this application as stated in his February 13, 1991 memo to tho Planning Commission. Bellows stated that, in her opinion, the applicants' plan is overly ambitious for the property. She also stated that the lake =11= Ir LedP 7 LJw�" J is low and makes it difficult to tell how far the lake normally comes on the property. Gaffron said, "There is no question that the lake is farther out. The 75' setback line is measured from the riprap." Bellows said, "If the applicants wash to undertake a remodeling project, it must occur within the existing confines o- extend out in another location. I cannot allow this house to creep any closer to the lake than it does currently." Terry Johnson stated that he had explored other options, but due to the interior layout of the house, avid other setack encroachments, the plan proposed represented the best option. He added that the distance between the house aid garage (250' approximately) posed a hardship. He said, "It is difficult for my wife to lug groceries that far, especially if it is raining, or really cold." Cohen stated that he concurred with Bellows. He added that he may give the applicants some consideration about the garage situation, but that there has to be a reduction in hardcover. Johnson stated that he would be willing to remove some of .he gravel and the detached garage. Bellows noted that the detached garage aid gravel area is outside of the 75-250' setback area. Hanson said, "I would consider that to be an improvement to .he property as a whole." Rowlette aid Cohen agreed that they would look more favorably on an addition to the existing house if those two items were removed. Rowlette added, "If you would add a second story entirely over the existing house, that is one thing. Extending the addition toward the lake is something else." Cohen asked Mr. Johnson if he would like the application tabled. Johnson stated that he would like an opportunity to revise his plan. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Moos, to table this application as requested by the applicant. (►5)PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING -CODE AMENDMENTS It was agreed by the Planning Commission to schedule a Public Hearing regarding Code Amendments for March 4, 1991 at 7:00 p.m. Rowlette indicated that she would be unable to attend. (t6)MORE SESSION The Planning Commission agreed to review the Code Amendments - 12 - Cortiricetc of Survey ... --• for D. Churlen Ib L.noy •Sw of Lot 13f., Spring Purk I!::rn�uln County, tiitu.esotu OM 1-0r/6.A b,... 'V{ ,i w... F... _ , I d - Ala �e0t • • __' � e»o t •.1 N c•.• -\1 tins s�fl �ncPminxd qo qc ald�iu .�7. M.J.".. (w•w+sd I I hereby certify that this Is a Iruo and correct representation of* a vlu eY of the h•und•,rles of Lot 136, Spring Pork, the locution of all e.aslin,: bull•.!tnf'e II„raa;:, :.nd the proposed location of a proposed bniloinF. Scaler 1- = 30• Data t 9-7-02 o t A•on aarker ii. Rj Qn'J;d� � I:a>I :;ury yor and Flamer Lon_ L.Ae, 1linnesotn Corti firete of Survey For n. fbm•l.es Ib\nay i • •u' of Wt 136, Spring Pork. �'� IIInn.tpls County, Il niosotu �• �Xo.' seat y H y y It i a. ' i `L'tn ••..r I.J f ��C�.,,'._ L / .:Milk IsL Y.�I W.W06J ..la.gk ..ng y Isms /1 Ir.Ju«.buL.q) 497. V i r�y1 awls /L 7. p..Lrd q•v.p odJ.'1.... '�• °�� ass lanlw...Iw•pw.J1 I hereby certify that this to a true - aM eerrect representation of a enuvey of tla LuuMsr lea of ' Lot 1%, Spring Pork, the loeatlan of all e:istlng bullaint-n M.N.."n, and the proposed i i Inanition of a proposed bWlulne. «. • 9caltit la = 30' (:n'J.ar It. Coffin flag .o. 4 Date a 4-7-r7 L.nd ;;urvoyor and planner o'• 1 Iron aorkor Ions I,.ie, Wnmeots I,. ..il. �_ - t`' • Corti flra is of Survey for 11• Clmrles Dor.ney ' •� of lot 136, SVrJug Purk. llanm{aln County, Mmwsoto t + . N N,.na pf.• ( .,1' Ns'NHAiisr it a on,bdd6J t Ar.. Jn, ``/ .fwa• � � � �'..__ tit . `:. Lr' sr �•,L xv.. .. �,.L��•-tom_ �. ,• �.. fi_ ..``... a Bare f..l xllw.k nn• "ro' — V I�5111' - i /wr a! Pmwrd qw nld"Isn e6A Irrdu.•r Ipw..d 1 I,hereby certify that this Ju a true and correct representation of o Im"ey of tbo Lwindurlee of tot 136, Sp•Jng Pork. the lova Llon of all edel)n;, Im IlAnr'a Mureor., and the proposed r location of a proposed bnllulnr. i Scalar la = 301 Hate s 9-7-S7 os iron knrkar 9'. ileK4 L•nul Durvoyor and Planner Lone Is. ie, 18nmeotn Cortlficatc of Survey for D. Charles Doi.ney •+; of Lot 136, Spring Fury. I:mnd;oln fuwd.y, lilnm,00ta tw>'. ✓�u. Ob /mlrl6.A %.r 7JA �iu•a l.r. � ;;Lo 71N 417. u .+ecknel,y �[ -\1 IM=pmpoxd garage sld�+wn ♦sx M.J...a. fprepwedl I herby certify that this is a iruu and correct representation of u muvey oi' tho loundaries of Lot Mg Spring Pork, the location of all e.:lsling Lulldinla It�rru;t, r.nd the proposed location of a proposed buil:inp. Scale: P = 30- date : 9-7-t'2 0 , : Iron aarkor Cp �'GS�v ✓1, � P (k�rd.ai h. Coffin Sag o. 4 lsnl :;uvv--yor and Flamer Wri_ Lice, KinnosoLr 0 14 Legal Description Lot 136, Spring Park This survey shows the I'cation of all existing buildings and visible "hardcover" In relation to the boundaries of the above described property. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. Date : 9-7-82.5-16-90 rev. I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or Scale: I- = 30' under my direct supervision and that I am a duly regist- m iron marker found ered land surveyor under the laws of the State ar- Mlnne- 0 iron marker set rota. Bearings shown are to an COFFIN a BROMBERG, INC. assumed datum. JJl E liar, ou6eerg n. 1c. No, Engineers, Land Surveyors, Planners Long Lake, Minnesota Certificate of Survey for S. Charles Downey of Lot 136, Spring Park Hennepin County, Minnesota as, # 7 004,b L 60 T4 t:Y 13 IV V urvey Shows the I^cation of all existing buildings Bible "hardcover" in relation to the boundaries of Dve described property. It does not purport to show her improvements or encroachments. by certify that this survey was prepared by me or ny direct supervision and that I :, duly regist- and surveyor under the laws of the States 6? Mlnne- & GRONBERG. INC. ��-o &6�:-X-- �—� c . q 0 . I z / 5 5 -rs Land Surveyors, Planners ike: Minnesota