The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutre: issues with bldg permit application Y � _ d Iy.t .� �QL��'ry' " CI7��'of OROI\TO « Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay,Minnesota 55323•Municipal Offices • � . � � On the North Shore of Lake Mircnetonka December 7, 1989 Mr. & Mrs . Chip Fisher 3300 Fox Street Long Lake, MN 55356 , Dear Mr. & Mrs. Fisher: . � The Building & Zoning Department is in receipt of your app3.ication for a building permit from Bruce Companies for construction of a new single fami3.y residence on your property. I discussed a number e following dditional1commentsDecember 6 , 1989 and would make th 1, Your stated intent 1 our new home ti s comp l ed eS Orono on the property until y Zoning Code Section 10.03 , Subdivision 7 ( see attached) a 3l.ows continued occupancy of the existing dwelling while the principal structure is being constructed. A permit for such occupancy would be issued with your bui3.ding permit and would expire after a 3 month period. An extension of the 3- month period wouldCeaof a�Certific tedofyOccupancyaforWyoud expire upon issuan new home. Although a decision on the final disposition of the existing house need not be made before the issuance of a building permit for the new one, we do need a WRITTEN REQI�EST FROM YOU NOW FOR TEMNEWAPRINCIPAL RES DENCE CONSTRUCTION?STING RESIDENCE DURING 2. Options for the old house are as follows: A) Tear it down. B) Sell the structure and_ have it moved off the + � property. C) Subdivide so o ra4.5 acre Iot in the 2 acre LR lA F separate parcel (y ; zone would appear large enough to accomplish a subdivision, al.though some variances to specific Iot � standards might be necessary) . ' � I BUILDING&ZONING-473-7357 • ADhtINISTRATION&FIN?.�CE-473-7358 • PUBLIC WORKS-473-7359 ASSFSSING FAX-473-0510 i . Mr. & Mrs. Chip Fisher, 3300 Fox Street December 7, 1989 Page 2 of 3 D) Request approval for a "guest house" conditional � use permit, per Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (G) . You have indicated that construction on the new house wiI I take approximately 5 months. The processing of a subdivision or a conditional use permit wou3d normally take approximately 2-3 months. You should make the necessary applications accordingly so that the issues with disposition of the existing residence are reso3ved at the time you wish to move into the new house. 3. Construction p lans for the new residence indicate 6 bedrooms. The septic system design was based on a 5 bedroom house. Your septic system designer must submit a revised septic system design that is based on a 6 bedroom home/900 gallon per day f Iow rate. Also, the site eva3uator should be advised that on both primary and alternate mound drainfields, the edges of the dike must meet the setbacks . - - ..from property lines. - � _ -- - - 4. A site inspection indicates your proposed residence meets the average 3.akeshore setback requirements, which simply means that aI 1 new structures (pools, tennis courts, decks, etc.) must be Iocated no closer to the lake than a Iine defined by the lakefront walls of neighboring adjacent houses. Your surveyor has shown that line on the survey, and aII. currently proposed construction appears to meet that setback. However, you include a pool equipment room but do not indicate a pool location. You should consider relocation of the proposed house as necessary to accommodate any proposed pool behind the average lakeshore setback line. As we discussed, the City is aware of the "no build Iine" covenant discussions you are having with Mr. Fullerton. The City has no legal interest in the outcome of that issue, and will not delay issuance of a building permit as Iong as aII City requirements are met. 5. The proposed building plans include a bar, sink and refrigerator in the basement. It would appear from the room Iayout that this is not intended to be a kitchenette serving a separate dwel Iing unit within the house, however, for the record, it is standard City pol�cy to advise you that a guest apartment within the existing dwel Iing would require a conditional use permit if that type of use was ever considered. Mr. & Mrs. Chip Fisher, 3300 Fox Street December 7 ► 1989 , • Page 3 of 3 6. Regarding the p roposed grading, no site grading can occur until the building permit is issued. No site grading will be allowed in the area of the primary and alternate drainfield sites nor within 20' of the boundaries of those sites. in of the shoreline requires permit approval by the Rip-rapp g f i 13 i n g, Minnehaha Creek Wat�ithin 751 of the normal shore3ine excavating or grading rovals from requires variance and conditiona3 use permit app the City of Orono, and as I mentioned to Mrs. Fisher, it is unlike3y that sufficient justification exists for the City to approve any regrading within 75' of the shoreline. Placement of additional topsoil and sodding will be allowed anywhere on the property (except in the drainfield sites) as Iong as the depth of �areanotdchangedl dWithint75Xcof the and overall contours shoreline, immediate sodding would be required rather than seeding. In areas outside the 0-75', regrading resulting .o� changes of contours (i.e. filling low spots 1-2' deep more) must be shown on a grading plan and would be permitted . as part of the norma3 construction process if included as � � part of your building permit application. Pl.ease provide the information notedeasel advise aas soon�as as soon as possible. AdditionallY�.0 P grading plan or house possibl.e if you wish to revise y Iocation. Please contact me at 473-7357 if you have any guestions. Sincerely, � _ �/ �_ Michael P. G fron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator MPG/tln cc: Mark Gronberg Bruce Companies, 539 Lake St, 4r'ayzata 55391 �To: 3300 Fox Street From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: August 14, 1990 Subject: Land Alteration in 0-75 ' Lakeshore Protected Zone, No Permits This afternoon, Inspector Bruce Vang was inspecting the property at 3250 Fox Street and witnessed grading occuring in the lakeshore at 3300 Fox Street. He investigated, and contacted me by radio immediately. I proceeded to the site immediately, and found that the grading contractor (apparently Boligan & Sons) had done major excavation to remove a hump of land within 75' of the lakeshore and had lowered the grade significantly in that area. We stopped the cat operator and he claimed he was just doing what he was told by his boss and he believed that Mr. Fisher and Mr. Steven Bruce (Bruce Companies, the general contractor for the house ) had met on the site prior to the work and he was just following orders. We immediately issued a Stop Work Order on the project, sent all the sub-contractors home, and I left the site to attempt to contact Mr. Fisher and Mr. Bruce. Inspector Bruce Vang and eventually Mrs. Fisher showed up at which time she and Bruce discussed the violations that were occuring. In the mean time, I contacted Chip Fisher's of,fice and was told by his secretary that he was out of town unti 1 Thursday. I then made contact with Steven Bruce who assured me that his intent was to have hay bales placed along the lakeshore, although he would certainly assist in the followup, he was not part of the "loop" with Mr. Fisher hiring a grading contractor. I notified Mr. Bruce that I need to meet with himself and Mr. & Mrs. Fisher tomorrow morning at 9 :00 on the site to discuss immediate restoration and protection of the site. I advised him that I expected him to follow through with erosion protection because it is likely that we will be getting rain tonight according to the radio. As a point of reference, I met with Mrs. Fisher on December 6 , 1989 and on December 7 , 1989 sent a letter to she and Mr. Fisher documenting our site inspection inspection of December 6th, and verifying clearly what could and could not be done as far as grading work on the property. This letter was cc: to the applicant' s surveyor and to Bruce Companies , the general contractor. Obviously, this letter has been ignored by both the property owners and the builder. I noted for the record in the • letter of December 7th that there is likely very little justification for the City to approve any regarding within 75' of � the shoreline. It appears that they have done this anyway. My ; only reasonable recommendation is that this area be restored i immediate ly and City staf f wi 11 recommend denia 1 shou ld an af ter- � the-fact application be forthcoming. � , ; . + I i I � � �