Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-15-2017 Planning Commission Packet PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DATE 6 - 15 - I '7 ❑ COUNCIL PLANNING COMMISSION ❑ OTHER Assistive Listening Device available upon request. Please complete the following information for City records: PRESENT FOR(from agenda) NAME (please print) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER 1. .1rn )) t" / / 3 r 1- LA) Ca/s U s- At &ovg-19- 9,25- 3. aro C Ire-hie((GJ .1 APc,., 8f,r4 /Ale S7 r t� � (z ed .� 4 5s6 1 4t-IScrr qtr/ 4. Bc't^ Ci„N D0- t0v\ rrr ss3a7 5. �, o del Er el €, 2gvr ��� Pt . kJ 6 6. P6C(-1--x Z �� a -� Z5s 07 ('a c co - de 7. Natt Q,) /01/1 S 14 ( 5_ fake�7- 8. (12-6( Kir\CAXS0 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. V:\(LEGAL FORMS)\(FORMS)\PUBLIC ATTENDANCE.DOC From: Tom Ahern To: Jeremy Barnhart"Steven Hatcher" Cc: steven.w.hatcher(aaverizon.corn;coshea007Cahotmail.com Subject: RE: 1325 Restpoint Lane Lot Planning Meeting Concerns Date: Monday,May 15,2017 12:04:06 PM Hi Jeremy, In addition to the information provided by Steve, I also thought it would be pertinent information for the Planning Commission to know that we are willing to explore purchasing the property from the seller and that we would essentially keep that space as Open Space. Also,there is a lot across the street from that would provide much better views that the Houghtmans have had for sale on and off that may be a viable option for the family to build on. Thanks Jeremy,we'll see you tonight. Tom G.Thomas Ahern CEO Coughlan Companies Inc and Capstone www.mycapstone.com Cell (612)991-6475 From:Jeremy Barnhart [mailto:jbarnhart@ci.orono.mn.us] Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 11:56 AM To: 'Steven Hatcher' <stevehatcher2@hotmail.com> Cc:Tom Ahern <tahern@capstonepub.com>; steven.w.hatcher@verizon.com; coshea007@hotmail.com Subject: RE: 1325 Restpoint Lane Lot Planning Meeting Concerns Steven, Thank you for your comments. I will pass these along to the Planning Commission. Jeremy Barnhart,AICP Community Development Director Direct 952.249.4626 Planning &Zoning Office 952.249.4620 2750 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 Website: www.ci.orono.mn.us From:Steven Hatcher [mailto:stevehatcher2Photmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 10:17 AM To:Jeremy Barnhart<jbarnhartPci.orono.mn.us> Cc:Tom Ahern <tahernPcapstonepub.com>;Steven Hatcher<stevehatcher2Photmail.corn>; From: Steven Hatcher To: Jeremy Bamhart Cc: Tom Ahern;Steven Hatcher;5teven.w.hatcherC@verizon.com;coshea007C1a hotmail.cona Subject: 1325 Restpoint Lane Lot Planning Meeting Concerns Date: Monday,May 15,2017 10:17:57 AM Attachments: Orono City Planning Meetina Notes.odf Importance: High Hello Jeremy, I am following up on the couple of conversations we have had about ours and other neighbors' concerns about the proposed building design and requested variances for 1325 Restpoint Lane. These concerns are based on professional assessment from water control professionals hired by my insurance company (USAA) and Mark Gronberg, Mark Gronberg and Associates, Engineering, Land Surveyors and Planners, both have voiced concerns about the effect the proposed excavation and builing structure will have on my and Mr.Tom Aherns' property. Here is a list of our conerns to the variances requested for the building on the lot at 1325 Restpoint Lane. 1. Water flow from excavation of proposed house would increase current water problems effecting my basement and would effect Mr. Aherns' basement and we are very concerned about the expense and unknown further water issues as a result of this building. 2. Proposed house that would affect the retaining wall located on my property. This property was previously owned by the previous owner of my property and had build the retaining wall along the easement and also had put in a blacktop driveway from edge of property to Restpoint Lane. 3. The previous owner had installed a portion of the sprinkler system on the property which he had owned, that system would need to be retrenched due to the proposed sale. 4. Current snow removal of property has become very challenging and will be more challenging with the location of the driveway and house location. 5. The road will have increased traffic with blind spots do to the layout of the house and garage. We have 12 grandchildren that play in that area and we have concerns about the increased traffic in a confined area. 6. Potential loss of property value due to the increased water issues from placement of house and water table disruption. These are issues that will cost us money and potential damage to our house. Thank you for you consideartion, we will be attending the planning meeting on May 15th. Steve Hatcher 612-839-9084 !!"�j. it - lF UE. I7 l I %%oivo Kenna -1-\-,----__,,_______1,11 i AGENDA --� ' City of Orono Planning Commission Meeting for s p�.u.rr.a igi u.o a.tu.rr.n.u.n.r innurnaNinommummairwummiewi n un.nmasommu.w 3�u.rr.nr. unlrrrr.ul�rr.nau■r..ufl� May 15, 2017; 6:30 PM --`"`� 1 �� Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, `°RFSHoi-` �- 1' •_„��< Orono, MN 55356 Legend ��iiff Drab ' - 952-249-4600/www.ci.orono.mn.us __ ; �-3836 ' e t��' _ �-.-�- % Roads r -`\ Chain#'17 3941 r—i ` f Council Representative: Wendy Dankey �� - U S Trunk Highway - I `. I = Minnesota Trunk Highway \� , ice,=-��° ?' Lag u (a►„ New Business = County Highway ;� i G • �O I ` 1. Approval of Planning Commission - L�al Roads l /���\ 'Illft �� 4 Meeting Minutes of April 17,2017. - Private Streets �� �` _ •�- _ '�--- i �\ Railroad 2. 17-3925 City of Orono, Text Amendment: \\ 1,ii k-� �c7 i, . _ - �, City Limits Small Lots/Setbacks ` ��1 �`�i rltj- (Staff: Jeremy Barnhart) �� `� \ �� = �� 3. 17-3934 Jim Kirkland on behalf of North 1 �` \\ Shore Marina, �V Sr.ua 1966 Shoreline Drive,Variances �� -----. ..--1.--L\: ; ) �u..y (Staff: Melanie Curtis) = 4. 17-3936 Orono Public Schools, _ 7 �" -� } 2687 Wayzata Boulevard West, ,`N , �., MbarB �� `1� inn Conditional Use Permit ` - ,- ,rte. "��- Staff: Jeremy Barnhart) ., . j , -- , , , 5. 17-3936 Orono Public Schools, _ I �� _ ` 685 Old Crystal Bay Road N, l Brains Conditional Use Permit O , Tanager y ! ..‘;‘1.-\` M. Lake (Staff Jeremy Barnhart) 11 > _ j li. f'"* 6. 17-3937 Black Bear Builders on behalf of `, Forest 1 �.- `_ a John Brooks /f�+J _ L'"' • ` -.� �__- i jai t(1,' I 905 Ferndale Road West, J N - ` _ . I� 73934 ■ Variances air i✓/�- ,Y ' a 1., (Staff: Melanie Curtis) I -IL-,. �., \ 1^ -` ! Poirot 7. 17-3938 TC Homes, Inc. on behalf of j•t .--y7,....(;),,,,, ���(l/; �/, �•, 1 a - Nancy Bloms, 7,d, i7ns 1325 Rest Point Lane, _,,j(_-__. oI�� ,a.r • crow a Variances .11111101 r1�`" __, 0 ear Lyle ! (Staff: Jeremy Barnhart) J�, Morison . v`z. ! r/ - �.�- L �qr.q ♦' • i 8. 17-3939 John Bailey, �,y�, .- 111-i i .+ _ -�� =-�. f 2807 Casco Point Road, J fl 4 7n.u.oirrrl�u.u# - ` �/} Conditional Use Permit DOG � �� r�� F - - ! (Staff: Melanie Curtis) Learwat �� • �� r- ff�r ' Bay a� `e 9. 17-3940 Jason&Anelise Peterson, 4IW �, �1_.- \�,1 �. t� Island �� 4105 Highwood Road, _ - • as •` Variances �' `,Qc •\J �� (Staff Melanie Curtis) _ ✓ � r_ o • rO - �✓�, ca►eatr: - - or - �`�� 10. 17-3941 Orono Public Schools, 05-15-2017 Cook's ;a�� 4 a y 9 /" ,� 1( 685 Old Crystal Bay Road N, PC Mtg✓��}� ;� � L, �- Text Amendment g �`�7{J�]��tQO�C��� �i cu. lir, �„�, ��� (Staff: Jeremy Barnhart) __,„-f- t,/�J�yll,���, _ -_ t \ '---.% �l� -. This dDisclarawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a r:� -- ,EA,E'J' 'J7�Q 7 Iw - �r�t '^^C •` l ..-_, -j �' J r of records,information,and data n r-- ���`��' 0 B O LTO N survey and is not intended to,be used as one This loc drawing Is a compilation & M E N K atedin«nouscity.�nty,andstateof�es,andother sources Mooing the area shown"and is to be used for reference purposes onq.The City of Orono n not 0 3,233 Feet responsible for any inaccuraaes herein contained Real People.Real Solutions. ®Bolton&Menk,Inc-Web GIS 5/11/2017 9:59 AM MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Chair John Thiesse,Commissioners Kevin Landgraver,Bruce Lemke,Denise Leskinen,Chad Olson, and Jon Schwingler. Representing Staff were Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, Senior Planner Michael Gaffron,City Planner Melanie Curtis,and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor Dennis Walsh was present. Chair Thiesse called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. NEW BUSINESS 1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 20, 2017 Lemke moved,Landgraver seconded,to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission meeting of March 20,2017,as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 2. #16-3883 KEVIN ANDERSON,800 NORTH ARM DRIVE,PRELIMINARY PLAT, 6:33 P.M.—7:22 P.M. Kevin Anderson,Applicant,was present. Gaffron stated this is a preliminary plat application for a 4-acre property proposed to be developed into three single-family residential lots. All lots would be served by a new private road and would be served with municipal sewer and individual wells. The property is located on North Arm Drive just east of the east end of the Lakeview Golf Course. The property has frontage on North Arm Bay. The west half of the property slopes gradually to the east with steep slopes at the easterly and northerly shorelines. The area where the north lot boundary nears the lakeshore is a bluff by definition and the property contains an existing residence at the east end and a number of outbuildings served by a 750-foot driveway. The property is zoned LR-1B,One Family Page 1 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Lakeshore Residential District,and is guided in the Orono Community Management Plan for residential use. The current proposal incorporates some of the recommendations from the sketch plan review that was conducted by the Planning Commission in April of 2016. It includes shortening of the private road. The initial proposal showed the road further to the east. The lot lines have been revised to create lot shapes that provide more functional and desirable buildable areas based on the existing topography but results in the need for a lot width variance for proposed Lot 1. Each of the three lots appears to meet the one acre dry buildable requirement. Lots 2 and 3 each meet the width requirement as measured at the shoreline and at the 75-foot setback. Lot 1 only meets the 140-foot standard in the 75-foot setback. The reason for the lot width variance request is based on the topography and the desired orientation for the house on Lot 2. If the variance is not allowed,the house on Lot 2 would have its main views overlooking a triangular lakeshore portion of Lot 1. Lot lines and lot areas could be adjusted to make Lot 1 completely conforming. If the Planning Commission is comfortable granting the variance,it should be clearly established why it is appropriate to grant that variance in order to avoid setting a precedent. Subdividing lakeshore property does result in some unique relationships between homes. In this proposed subdivision,Lots 1 and 2 each have a home site that meets the 75-foot setback as well as the average setback when it is defined by the house at 790 North Arm and the existing house. The following scenarios could happen based on the City's current setback ordinance: 1. If the first home built is in the"possible house"location shown on Lot 2,that changes the average setback line for future replacement of the existing house on Lot 3 and would force such replacement to move far back on the lot to where it is not wide enough to be built on. 2. If the first home built is on Lot 1 and is placed farther west than shown,the average setback for a home on Lot 2 would change. Page 2of72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. 3. If the first home built is a replacement for the existing house on Lot 3 and it is moved further back in order to have a house,decks,etc. meet the 75-foot setback,then the average setback for Lot 2 would be affected and potentially also the average setback for Lot 1. Gaffron stated the most logical solution is that the allowable lake setback for each lot be established as part of the subdivision approvals. These would be in effect regardless of how or in what order the three lots are developed or redeveloped. How this is structured might have an impact on the average setback lines applicable to the adjacent homes at 790 North Arm Drive and 830 Windjammer Lane. Those homes are set back far enough so as to likely not be impacted since proposed and existing homes on Lots 1 and 3 are nearer the lake than those neighboring homes. The Planning Commission should consider whether the proposed house site on Lot 1 will be nearer the lakeshore than the home at 790 North Arm and whether that neighboring home enjoys lake views that would be blocked by the house on Lot 1. The proposed home site on Lot 1 is located more than 30 feet from the defined top of bluff,since no structures are allowed within 30 feet of the top of bluff and the top of bluff as depicted. As it relates to Lot 2,the topography and location of the existing municipal sewer lines are complicating factors. The municipal sewer installed in 1973 crosses the property from north to south. The sewer lines consist of a gravity line flowing from south to north across the site,discharging to a lift station at the very north end of the property at the shore. The easement for that sewer line pair is 20 feet wide and no structures can be built over that easement. The impact is that the proposed house location for Lot 2 is restricted to the area between the sewer easement and the 75-foot setback,with little flexibility for shifting the house. To make matters worse, the actual vehicle route used by the Public Works Department is also located in this area. It is necessary on a regular basis to bring a truck down to the lift station for maintenance since there is no other way to access the lift station. The City needs to preserve this non-easement route for future sewer system maintenance. Lot 3 contains the existing house. Replacing the house will likely require it to move back from the lake some distance,as the 75-foot setback line appears to run through the east side of the structure. With or without the proposed subdivision,an average lakeshore setback variance would be required for replacement of this house. Page 3 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. The developer is proposing the road be private. Even though only a small number of homes will be served,City code requires for 3-6 lots a 24-foot paved road within a 50-foot road corridor,ending in a 100-foot diameter cul-de-sac with 80 feet paved width. At slightly less than 300 feet in length,the cul-de- sac meets the City's 1000-foot maximum length limitation. In addition,the proposed cul-de-sac location abuts the rear yard of the existing residence at 835 Windjammer Lane. While those owners and their predecessors have experienced a single private driveway at that location since the house at 835 was built in 1969,the driveway at 800 North Arm has existed at its current location since at least the 1940s or earlier based on available historic air photos. Moving the private road further north to provide some buffer might be feasible but would result in a less usable street yard area for Lot 1. The CMP does not indicate any future trails along North Arm Drive. No sidewalks exist in this area of Orono and none are contemplated. There are not any planned parks or anticipated park needs relative to development of this property. The total park fees would be$11,100. The creation of a new road,homes,driveways and other impervious surfaces will require stormwater management measures,likely including creation of stormwater conveyance and storage systems. Ponding areas will require the establishment of easements and the ponding areas will not be credited as dry buildable area. Stormwater management will be subject to City and MCWD review and approval. The property and each proposed lot are within Tier 1 of the Stormwater Overlay District, subject to a maximum hardcover per lot of 25 percent. The property will also be subject to the Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fee. The total SW&DT Fee will be either$10,500 or$15,750 and is dependent on whether the existing house will remain. Municipal sewer is available to serve development at this site. This property was assessed for two sewer units and 280 feet of frontage as part of the 1973 sewer project. A third sewer unit at the 2017 connection charge rate of$5,100 would be due upon final plat approval. Page 4 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. The existing sewer connection for the house on Lot 3 runs across proposed Lots 1 and 2 along the shoreline. Leaving it as is will require establishment of easements between the properties. Adding sewer stubs to serve Lots 1 and 2 is likely necessary but may be difficult since the existing gravity line is approximately 15-20 feet below existing grade. An engineered design for these connections may be necessary. Private wells will be required. There is a narrow wetland located on the north side of the property delineated in 2011. The applicants have not been able to find the paperwork on that delineation and are planning to have the wetland re- delineated in the spring. No changes are anticipated. There will likely be buffer setbacks required from the MCWD. The City will require a Conservation and Flowage Easement over this strip of wetlands. Due to the need for vehicular access for municipal sewer maintenance,the City will require that buffer widths and locations be established in a manner that will accommodate such maintenance. The developer has submitted a Conservation Design report and recommendations. The property has been reviewed in terms of the Rural Oasis goals and policies of the City ordinance. The report provides an inventory of the natural resources on the site,discussed how the proposed site design interplays with existing features,and establishes a vegetation management plan addressing wetland buffers and invasive species control. It is likely some of the trees will need to be removed as a result of construction of the road and driveways. The Planning Commission should consider the following issues: 1. Establishment of an average lakeshore setback determination structured to be independent of when new homes get built on the site,with an eye toward not having negative impacts to the average setbacks for the adjacent neighboring homes. 2. Review the lot width variance requested for Lot 1 and recommend whether that variance is justified and supportable. 3. Discuss with the applicant the limitations for the building site on Lot 2 due to shape of the lot, the 75-foot setback,the average setback,and sewer easements. Page 5 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. 4. Consider if there are any significant impacts of the road location to adjoining properties,and if so, are there alternative configurations or mitigations that would reduce such impacts if needed. 5. Address the fact that sewer maintenance access is critical and must be addressed as part of the subdivision process,likely requiring new easements and potentially buffer width averaging. 6. A new sewer connection for Lots 1 and 2 will have to be established,and an easement for the connection for Lot 3 over Lots 1 and 2 needs to be addressed as part of the subdivision process. The Planning Commission should review the Staff report as well as the submitted documentation. The Planning Commission should hold the public hearing and then make a recommendation for either approval or denial. Staff will not present this application to the City Council for review until the updated wetland delineation has been submitted. In addition,the applicant should plan to meet with the Orono Public Works Sewer and Water Supervisor as soon as possible to review the route for sewer maintenance vehicles. Lemke asked if there is any advantage to having the cul-de-sac go in so far. Gaffron stated that results in shorter driveways but noted the cul-de-sac could be shortened up further. If the area on the west side of Lot 1 has value as yard,changing the length of the cul-de-sac might change the nature of the yard. Landgraver asked if there is precedent for the city maintenance road. Gaffron stated it is likely there are other places where the Public Works Department has to drive over private property to maintain the sewer system since the City has approximately 40 lift stations. There is an agreement currently for maintenance of this road up to a certain point and that agreement will have to be revised. Page 6 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Landgraver commented it is possible to envision friction between the homeowners and the maintenance workers given that situation. Landgraver noted the existing sewer gravity line goes from Lot 3 downhill and that it looks like there is a rain garden on top of that. Gaffron stated the expectation would be that that sewer line would need to be moved. Thiesse asked if the 40' x 80' house footprint standard. Gaffron noted they are shown as a possible house and that the homes that are being built today have a number of angles. Gaffron stated it is unlikely someone will construct a house that is rectangular in shape. Kevin Anderson,Applicant, stated in regards to relocating the house on Lot 2, it gets pretty tight given all the different angles and that they have reworked the lot lines significantly to try to provide as much flexibility as possible. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 6:51 p.m. Ray Wahlender, 1070 Tonkawa Road, stated he is one of the owners of 800 North Arm. Wahlender stated while he is generally positive about the prospect for improvements on this property,in his view splitting this parcel into three lots is quite a stretch and that there are a lot of contortions being done to try to achieve three lakeshore lots. Wahlender stated the developer will have some real problems with lake access for Lot 1 and that he knows from personal experience that it is too shallow to catch pan fish in that area. Wahlender indicated it is a wetland area that seeps into a marshy wetland area and that you cannot get a pontoon in there. If you look at the contours with 790 North Arm,any dock that is installed will likely violate the provisions of LMCD Section 201, Subdivision 2B,which requires that any slip which opens towards a sight line be 20 feet back from that sight line. Wahlender stated in his view it will be problematic to try to get a dock in there parallel to the sight line,and in order to get it out to any sort of depth,it would probably violate the sight line for Lot 2. Wahlender stated calling it a lakeshore lot is problematic for them and that it appears to be jammed in there. Page 7 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17, 2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. With regards to Lot 2,Wahlender stated he also believe that has some shallow areas and it would be difficult to get a boat in and out of there. Wahlender commented putting two lakeshore lots on the north side of the peninsula sounds like a recipe for people fighting about dock placement. Wahlender stated if one were to construct a house of any height right there on Lot 1,it would block the light to the adjoining property's back yard. There will also likely be issues with runoff given the close proximity of the house. Over time that blockage of light and possible drainage issues are going to create a much damper back yard. If you go from what is immediately behind 790 North Arm,there is a steep drop-off right before the lakeshore that goes down to a little grassy area just above the lakeshore,which is where the pump station is. Wahlender stated he would want somebody to take a look at that,because if there is too much moisture,the area could slide down. Wahlender stated it has ramifications to 800 North Arm and the sewer system that is located down there,which is very concerning to them. Wahlender stated on the very south end of 790 North Arm there is a very nice screened in porch that does have some view of the lakeshore. Based on the placement of the house on Lot 1,it is very likely that they will be looking at HVAC systems, generators,exhaust pipes and things of that nature. Wahlender stated he would not like that either. Wahlender stated it appears they are wedging three parcels where it would be better if there were only two lots. Wahlender requested the City look into some of these issues prior to approving anything and that he would also be happy to discuss this with the property owners. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 6:57 p.m. Thiesse stated he would like to start with the average setback. Thiesse stated he would like to see that average setback maintained until the first two homes are constructed,at which time it comes back to the City for review. Thiesse asked if the City has any control over mandating that a new house be pulled back behind the 75-foot line if the existing house is reconstructed. Gaffron stated to his belief the City can do that. Gaffron stated assuming there was no subdivision,the existing house is way forward of the average setback. Once there is a subdivision,depending on how Page 8 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. many lots there are,he does not believe there is any way that the existing house will be behind the average setback line. Gaffron indicated it would have to be pushed back if it is rebuilt in order to meet the setback to the lake unless some special arrangements are made now. Thiesse stated he would like to see the same footprint on all the homes and that he would like the house to be out of the 75-foot setback. Thiesse stated because this is a peninsula,to his knowledge the City has been a little more lenient on the average lakeshore setback,but that he would like it out of the 75-foot area. Lemke noted if they rebuild in kind,it can be rebuilt in exactly the same location. Gaffron stated it is very unlikely that someone will rebuild that house in kind to the extent in kind means the same shape, the same rooflines, etc. Thiesse stated if a house on any lot is built,that house could establish the setback and not the building pad where the existing house is. Thiesse asked how the Planning Commission feels about the lot width variance. Leskinen stated she does not see a compelling reason to create a nonconforming lot,especially since the City historically has not done that. Thiesse noted there is no practical difficulty. Landgraver stated the house will be pretty far back on the bluff and that this is a way of securing visibility for Lot 1. Landgraver concurred that there is not a strong argument for creating a nonconforming lot and that Lot 2 also has a number of constraints. Thiesse stated it is difficult to come up with a practical difficulty for the variance since there is adequate space. Thiesse stated in his view they should be measuring from where the house is rather than at the shoreline but that is not what the ordinance says. Page 9 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Landgraver stated it appears the house on Lot 2 will be tight but that it may be possible to orient it to maximize views. Thiesse noted the building pad is proposed to consist of 3,200 square feet. Thiesse asked whether there will be headlights shining into the proposed house on Lot 2. Anderson indicated there will be. Thiesse asked if the Planning Commission has any thoughts on Item 4,which is significant impacts of the road location to adjoining properties. Leskinen stated having shortened the cul-de-sac makes a big difference. Thiesse asked if the developer has looked at pulling it further back. Anderson indicated he has not. Thiesse stated in regards to Item 5, the City does need an easement to access the lift station. Gaffron noted Staff has recommended that the applicant meet with the Public Works supervisor to discuss that. Staff has suggested the applicant's surveyor stake the easement and depict the easement on the survey since he is familiar with the property. Gaffron stated this issue has existed for a long time,and if this was not a subdivision application,this discussion would not be happening. Lemke asked if there would have to be any type of treatment to make it an accessible road. Gaffron stated there would need to be a sufficient road base to drive a loaded truck over it. Gaffron commented the topography is such that the trucks cannot traverse much of a side slope and that it is critical to identify a route. Leskinen commented she recalls a very lengthy discussion about this last year and that to her recollection the consensus was that it needs to be where it is. Page 10 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse noted Item 6 relates to new sewer connections for Lots 1 and 2. Thiesse asked if the developer has a plan for how sewer will be provided. Anderson indicated not at this point. Thiesse stated that is a piece of information that will need to be provided and addressed. Thiesse asked if the Planning Commission has any thoughts on the issues expressed by Mr. Wahlender. Thiesse stated this area is not a lot different from other areas on North Arm and that there are some areas that are inaccessible. Wahlender stated based on his experience,the dock would need to be extended way back and that they would have to go out into the main part of the channel and then come back in. As you go southeast along the shoreline,it is very shallow. Thiesse noted that is outside of the Planning Commission's jurisdiction and that the LMCD will need to look at it. Gaffron stated the applicant will need to speak with the LMCD and that the City would not be involved in that. Thiesse asked if the developer is requesting any variances for the house on Lot 1. Gaffron noted there is a 30-foot setback from top of bluff and that the proposed house meets the side setbacks as well as street. Gaffron stated the depicted rectangle meets code standards,but the question is whether someone would be doing a disserve to the neighborhood if they construct right up to the 10-foot setback. Thiesse stated his biggest concern is that light and air come into play when asking for a variance. Thiesse asked if those two things come into play when a variance is not being requested. Page 11 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Gaffron stated he is not aware of a situation in the past where that was a factor when someone was meeting the setback requirements as well as the height requirement. Across the bay there was a situation where someone was building a house that did meet the City's height requirement and the neighbors had an issue with someone building a house that would block their garden. Gaffron commented it is unusual for the City to take that into account, especially when a variance is not being requested. Wahlender stated if you add in the fact that a house is constructed directly to the north of the yard and the drainage is altered along the ridge,he would have some questions about the structural integrity of the drop-off. Wahlender stated if the house is tall enough,that will make it very soggy back there and there will be very soggy ground that overlooks the sloped pitch which overlooks the lift station. Wahlender stated in his view those are some important issues that the Planning Commission needs to look at. Lemke asked if the house location is exactly 30 feet back from the bluff. Gaffron illustrated the 30-foot setback on the survey and noted that the house could be moved to be as much as 20 or 30 feet away from the lot line. Landgraver stated the solution seems to be to simply move the house on Lot 1,depending on its size,to allow ample light to that area. Thiesse asked if it is possible to move the house over. Anderson indicated that would make the most sense and that the people that he has talked to about this lot would like to construct a walkout rambler. Landgraver stated the other item that would be favorably viewed is some landscaping that would help screen the area. Thiesse suggested some contours also be provided showing how the drainage will work. Landgraver moved to recommend approval of Application No. 16-3883,Kevin Anderson, 800 North Arm Drive,granting of preliminary plat approval and denial of a lot width variance,with Page 12 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. the average lakeshore setback being established by the existing houses as constructed with the original plat and subject to Staff recommendations. Gaffron noted if the house on Lot 3 is torn down,it will need to meet the 75-foot setback. Gaffron asked whether that house should meet the average setback as defined by 830 North Arm. Thiesse stated it probably cannot. Landgraver asked if the objective is to make it conform. Thiesse indicated it is to get it out of the 75-foot zone. Schwingler seconded the motion. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 3. #17-3911 LAKE WEST DEVELOPMENT,LLC,3245 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST, ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT,7:23 P.M.- Curt Fretham, Lake West Development, was present. Gaffron noted this item was tabled at the March Planning Commission meeting. Due to the cancellation of the April 5 work session,the Planning Commission should also refer to the attached work session packet. The contractor for the Hennepin County Wayzata Boulevard improvement project has obtained a permit from MnDOT to use a site at 365 Old Crystal Bay Road for the recycling and storage operation for Phase I of the highway improvements. Gaffron stated that takes some of the pressure off in terms of the timing of this application,but the applicant has requested that their application for a text amendment and IUP approval continue to be reviewed,as they would like to be prepared for use of the Eisinger site for later phases of the Wayzata Boulevard improvements.. Page 13 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. The intent of this review is to look at the advantages and potential disadvantages of an interim use permit. An interim use permit is intended to be temporary and allows for sunsetting of a use for a temporary time period that may not be appropriate on a permanent basis. In considering whether the City should adopt an interim use ordinance,it may be helpful to identify examples where a temporary use may be reasonable but is not appropriate at a given location on a permanent basis. Examples found in other Minnesota cities' codes are typically tied to specific zoning districts. While there are some consistencies,it also appears that every city has its own ideas of what to regulate via an interim use permit. Gaffron stated area cities that utilize an interim use permit include Plymouth,Medina,and Minnetonka. Some of the uses defined as an interim use by those cities are regulated by different methods in Orono, such as by licensing or special event permit. Gaffron noted there are a few local governments that list an interim use similar to that proposed by the applicants. Isanti County lists as an interim use,"Temporary construction facilities associated with road construction or reconstruction projects. Facility types allowed include blacktopping processing facilities which includes the processing of recycled materials as well as concrete recycling storage areas." The City of Andover allows the temporary processing and storage of sand,gravel,or other materials. In addition,Chisago City allows temporary processing or recycling plant in conjunction with a specific project. Adding the ability to allow for specified interim uses within specified zoning districts gives the City and property owners a method or tool for the temporary use of property. It provides an option for properties that are expected to be developed in the future in conformity with the zoning code,but for various reasons such future development will not occur immediately. As it relates to the Eisinger property,the developer has gained preliminary plat approval for housing,but does not anticipate actual development of the site for a number of years. An example of how an interim use permit could have been used in Orono was the former produce market at County Road 6 and Highway 12. That site was zoned for single-family use and was operating via a Page 14 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. "nonconforming use conditional use permit"in the 1960s. Later conditional use permits were approved for minor expansion of the market use. When the market closed,the building eventually became a daycare center via a new conditional use permit. When MnDOT determined that the property would be needed for the Highway 12 bypass,the daycare use discontinued but it was a number of years before that part of the bypass was constructed. As a result,the building sat empty for a number of years. Because the City had no interim use ordinance,any temporary use of the site was not allowed. Potential disadvantages of an interim use permit include property owners proposing land uses that are inappropriate for a given site or disruptive to the neighboring property owners or would be inconsistent with the character of the surrounding area. If the Council approves an amendment to the Zoning Code to allow interim uses,the City,developers and the property owners will have to be very clear about the parameters for such use. Clear and concise documentation of the allowed land use,activities and time periods will be required with each IUP issued. The City must be diligent not only in establishing appropriate interim uses within specified zoning districts but in monitoring those uses for compliance with the established terms of each issued IUP. Before the Planning Commission tonight is a draft ordinance. This is drafted similar to the general code section on conditional uses. It contains language that mimics the state statute on interim uses and also contains certain provisions that should pertain to all interim use permits. Sample ordinances from other cities are also attached. Gaffron stated while the ordinances differ widely,there are four common elements: A definition purpose and intent; application procedures; standards and conditions;and a termination clause. Gaffron noted the companion application to the text amendment includes a request for an interim use permit in the RR-1B, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. The applicant is proposing temporary use of the property at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard fo staging of construction activities associated with the County Road 112 improvement project. The Planning Commission should review the provided information and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of having an interim use option in the zoning code and review the draft text amendments. The Planning Commission should also identify any specific concerns about the proposed construction staging/materials recycling use and suggest any additional conditions that might be applicable. Page 15 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff. Curt Fretham,Lake West Development,stated as Staff has pointed out,the MnDOT contractor has found another site,which makes it hard to compete since it is free space. Fretham stated he is not sure the contractor will stay at that site the entire time and that he is hopeful he can still move forward since the project will be ongoing for three years. Lemke noted there was a 3-page letter submitted that raises some concerns. Fretham indicated he did read the entire letter and that his company has done this type of operation in areas that were more densely populated. Fretham noted the equipment that is used today is very modern and controls the dust very well. Fretham indicated he is prepared to adhere to standards that will not cause problems with the neighbors. Thiesse asked if he has confirmed whether this would still be a viable operation if materials from outside the area are not allowed to be brought in. Thiesse noted his understanding is that Phase I will be mostly concrete recycling and Phases II and III will be more bituminous. Fretham stated the previous discussion was about needing a site to recycle material and that he would have more flexibility if materials from other projects can be recycled in conjunction with this project. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. Allan Engleman,315 North Old Crystal Bay Road, stated he is not in favor of Lake West's proposal. Engelman noted Mike Gaffron made a comment earlier tonight that there is an alternate site with Eureka on state property and that he wants to know what is going on there. Engleman commented everyone here, including the City Attorney,says Orono cannot do anything. Engleman stated the City Attorney is not doing his job and that he wants to know what is happening with Eureka. Engleman asked whether they will be able to come in there prior to obtaining a permit. Page 16 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Gaffron stated the City Attorney has advised that the city cannot issue a permit since it is state land and that Orono does not have permitting authority over state land. Gaffron indicated the City can enforce certain performance standards on the operation such as times of operation,but that it is difficult to regulate the operatio since it will occur on state land. Engleman stated in his view there are things that can be done but they cannot be done immediately. Gaffron stated he understands Mr. Engleman had a conversation with the City Administrator today who has told him basically the same thing. Engleman asked how the state can move in if it is zoned 2-acre residential. Gaffron stated the state trumps city zoning. Engleman stated in regards to the letter from the Dumases,they will have a bigger problem now than with Lake West since the equipment will be closer to them. Thiesse stated unfortunately the City's hands are tied. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 7:43 p.m. Leskinen stated in concept an interim use permit can be a tool for the City. Leskinen noted when the Planning Commission discussed this a long time ago and to her recollection there were some cautionary tales. Leskinen stated the City would have to be very diligent about it and that she is concerned there are uses that can either be inappropriate and hard to get rid of or may do irreparable damage to the site. Leskinen indicated she is open to the idea but that she does have some reservations. Landgraver indicated he is in favor of it since it is another tool in the City's toolbox. Currently the only tool the City has is a conditional use permit,which goes with the land and is permanent, and the interim use permit only goes for a certain time period. Landgraver stated it would force the City to be disciplined and make sure all the T's are crossed. Page 17 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Leskinen noted in Exhibit A, Section 78-1728c,it states the interim use permit shall be renewed annually by the City Council. Leskinen asked if they would be reviewed for compliance if they are renewed annually. Gaffron stated when the initial interim use permit is established, there would be a trigger date for when it ends. If the Council decides they want to conduct an annual review,the Council does have the authority to require that, and can end the interim use if established conditions are not being met. Leskinen asked if it can be terminated for cause. Gaffron indicated it can be. Thiesse asked,once this IUP option is adopted,how many interim use permits might be in place at one time, 30 or 40? Gaffron indicated maybe three or four. Thiesse stated if there will not be that many permits,he would like to review them every six months. Gaffron stated the time period for the reviews can be written into the IUP resolution for each specific use and for each specific site. Leskinen stated the resolution format would be very much like a traditional conditional use where the conditions are spelled out. Leskinen asked if the main differences are that it does not run with the land and has a sunset date. Gaffron indicated that is correct. Gaffron noted the list of allowed interim uses could be a number of different uses or it could be limited to one use. Lemke asked what would happen if the site is not restored to its original condition. Page 18 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Gaffron stated with each interim use permit, an escrow could be established. Gaffron indicated he would prefer to have incentives to comply included with the approval,such as a larger escrow. Landgraver asked whether a public hearing would be required. Gaffron indicated it would be. Gaffron noted Line 50 in Attachment A outlines the application procedures. Thiesse asked if the City would be obligated to allow a certain use if it is approved at one site. Gaffron stated if a specific use meets all the conditions we want to establish for that site,there would be no reason not to approve it,but the Council has the ability to place whatever conditions it wants on it. Landgraver commented that would allow some flexibility. Landgraver asked how the ordinance language in part B relates to the text in part A. Gaffron indicated B adds a section to the RR-1B District entitled Interim Uses,and lists one allowable interim use that can be applied for. Leskinen stated A would be the general interim use permit standards,B would be where it is allowed and what it is,and C(the application for the Eisinger site)would be to establish the specific conditions. Gaffron stated once the Planning Commission completes its review of A and B, Section C would need to come back for review of the specific language for the specific site. Thiesse noted the Planning Commission is only dealing with A and B tonight. Thiesse stated he has concerns with allowing temporary construction facilities in the RR-1B District and that in his view it should be located adjacent to the construction project and materials from that project only. Lemke suggested the Planning Commission take each section at a time. Page 19 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Lemke moved,Leskinen seconded,to recommend approval of text amendment per the attachment A of the work session packet,but revising the wording of Line 102 to add "at a minimum" requiring annual review. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. Thiesse asked if Staff has any concerns with B. Gaffron stated the RR-1B District is a fairly substantial residential district. As an interim use,the City is saying in general this is a district that might allow this,with specific conditions to be established by the Council,such as a time limit and site layout. Gaffron noted that does not mean the Planning Commission or City Council is required to approve the use for any property in the RR-1B District. Any proposed use would have to meet all of the IUP standards contained in A. Gaffron stated if they do not meet those, even though it is an allowed interim use in the RR-1B district,the City can say no. Thiesse stated one of his concerns is that the City is jumping forward for a specific project,which is the Highway 112 project. Lemke asked if this is the type of thing that would go along with an application. Thiesse stated in his view the City needs an interim use permit option but that they do not need it right now. Thiesse commented the City will find out how it works on the MnDOT property and that he is not sure whether the City has to rush through with this now. Gaffron stated the applicant has indicated he is looking at future phases should the MnDOT site not work out. Thiesse noted Phase II is on the other side of Long Lake and that the materials would need to be hauled through the city. Gaffron stated the urgency is not here today as it was a month or two ago. Landgraver stated since A was approved,an interim use permit can be issued. Page 20 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Gaffron stated B would also need to be approved. Gaffron noted that similar to the conditional use code section,if a conditional use or interim use is not listed in the zoning district,then it is not allowed. Thiesse stated this type of use would need to be identified in the RR-1B district prior to issuing an interim use permit. Leskinen commented she has concerns about this particular use since it is so industrial for the RR-1B district. Landgraver stated the only identified interim use the City would have is what is listed in B and the only place where it can be done is in the RR-1B district. Landgraver stated all this is doing is giving the City a tool. Thiesse noted the RR-1B district cover the majority of the City. Landgraver stated someone would still have to apply for an interim use permit and meet all the conditions that will be set. Leskinen noted the Planning Commission is not approving the specific interim use permit being requested by the applicant by approving B but they are saying the City now has this new tool in theory that has to meet all the conditions the City feels are appropriate. Thiesse noted there will be equipment that will be generating noise,such as backup beepers and trucks coming and going. Thiesse stated he does not care about the storage of items on the property but that there will be a lot of noise and distractions that come from a site like this. Thiesse stated he could understand it if they are taking the material from Orono's road and recycling it,but that he is not looking for even a short-term business to come in and do this type of work. Leskinen stated her concern is bringing in materials from outside projects. Leskinen noted the 3-page letter also cited concerns with air quality as well as a number of other concerns regardless of the location. Leskinen stated the use feels so industrial and that she does not want to regret the decision afterwards. Page 21 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17, 2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Landgraver stated ironically it is happening and therefore the City is advocating control. Thiesse commented three years from now the City may not ever see another one of these operations again. Schwingler stated the concerns are legitimate but noted Orono is not the first community to see this type of operation. Thiesse commented the City can make a much better decision in a month after they have had a chance to observe the other site in operation. Landgraver stated the reasons for an interim use permit are to allow something the City did not think of and that it is short-term in nature rather than permanent,creates a land use opportunity, and allows an empty lot to be used. Thiesse stated it would come down to C where all the conditions are listed. Olson asked if B would be attached to every single C that comes forward. Thiesse stated every C would be under the interim use and the only one before the City is the current application. Gaffron stated if someone wants to do a mining operation(the Maple Grove example)that eventually will become a shopping center,an interim use permit is the perfect way to do it. Gaffron stated interim use permits have been used successfully elsewhere. Thiesse stated he is not seeing a big benefit to Orono for this type of use. Landgraver moved, Schwingler seconded,Application No. 17-3911,Lake West Development,to recommend approval of the text amendment put forward by Staff for an interim use permit in the RR-1B district as written in Exhibit B.VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. Page 22 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. 4. #17-3910 LAKE WEST DEVELOPMENT,LLC,3245 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,8:13 P.M.—8:43 P.M. Curt Fretham,Lake West Development,Applicant,was present. Gaffron stated the applicants are requesting the City approve a permit for interim use of the property at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard for staging of construction activity associated with the Highway 112 improvement project. There appear to be few suitable options for a staging area for that project and this property scores high marks in terms of this type of use since the site is open and relatively flat,has good accessibility,and is relatively remote from nearby residential properties. Potential negative impacts such as noise, dust,vibration,etc., should be minimal as compared to most other locations within the Wayzata Boulevard corridor. Gaffron stated with the assumption that an interim use ordinance is adopted,a list of likely required conditions for this use at any location would include minimum separation distance from nearby structures or lot lines,minimum lot size,road maintenance,traffic control measures,and restricted to government sponsored public improvement projects. Additional site specific conditions should also be considered in approving the proposed construction staging use. The portion of the site proposed for construction staging is primarily over the closed landfill area of the property. The landfill has been closed for many years and is relatively open and flat. Layers of clean fill over the landfill were added by the former owner in order to establish a suitable cap for the landfill and assure appropriate runoff characteristics. The current owners have had borings done in the landfill area in order to determine the stability and extent of the landfill as well as what materials might be encountered if a future phase of residential development is ever proposed. The area which gained preliminary approval in 2016 for residential development is not within the proposed temporary staging area. The proposed site use plan indicates the rock construction entrance to be located where the approved future residential access would be located. This access point has been approved by Hennepin County as a temporary construction access. Page 23 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has approved an erosion control permit for the construction staging activity. The Long Lake Fire Chief has indicated no issues with use of the site for construction staging. The Public Works Director has indicated this location is likely as good a location as the contractor will find for construction staging. The site plan suggests that temporary lighting will likely be utilized, and it is likely that to minimize impact on traffic flow, some work on the highway improvements will be at night. It would be appropriate to establish that any temporary lighting be downcast and directed away from residential areas. The site plan also indicates a proposed visual and noise-screening berm along the west and south boundaries of the site. The applicant is working with the MPCA to establish parameters and obtain permits for this berm. The City will require a grading plan be approved for this and it potentially will require a conditional use permit based on the volume of permanent fill material. The applicants have suggested that this site might be used as a recycling yard for projects other than just the Wayzata Boulevard improvements. The applicants should describe what is actually intended and how the contractor or Hennepin County expects to operate this site. One question to be answered is whether it is the City's expectation that this site is intended to be in use exclusively for the Wayzata Boulevard project and not as a regional recycling yard. Gaffron noted a letter from the Dumas family in opposition to the proposed use has been received. Some of their concerns involved the level or type of activity associated with the use,the location of the site,and the duration of the proposed use. If the Planning Commission concludes that the site is appropriate for the proposed use, Staff would recommend that an interim use permit be issued subject to at least the following conditions: 1. Establish an end date of the use to be no later than completion of the Wayzata Boulevard improvements. Page 24 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. 2. Use of the site is intended solely for activities related to the Wayzata Boulevard improvement project and may not be used to support other projects. 3. Use of the site shall be subject to Orono Code standards with regard to noise,lighting,dust control,street maintenance, etc. 4. Appropriate permits to be obtained from Hennepin County,Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, MPCA,and any other agencies or governing authorities as may be required for activities on the site. 5. Construction of a proposed permanent screening berm along the south and southwesterly boundaries of the site will require conditional use permit application and approval. 6. An annual review of the interim use permit shall be conducted to determine whether the use remains acceptable during the duration of the Wayzata Boulevard improvement project. 7. Any other conditions the Planning Commission and City Council determine should be included. The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff. Curt Fretham,Lake West Development, stated in regards to what this operation will look like,the property consists of 29 acres and is half wetland and half dry. To the east is the wetland area that abuts the Dumas apple orchard. Fretham stated in his view it is kind of a private or isolated property with no neighbors in close proximity. Fretham indicated they have done a recent project in Golden Valley consisting of the demolition and removal of a large commercial building within a residential zone on a 2-acre site. Fretham stated that was located in a residential neighborhood,with the homes being located approximately 500 feet away. Fretham indicated they did that project in an environment that did not cause the nearby residents' cars in their driveways to get dusty or the furniture on their patios to get dusty. In addition, a similar project was Page 25 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. done in St. Louis Park off of Wooddale. In that situation a church located within a residential area was removed. Fretham stated in his view they will be able to do a good job at this site without raising a lot of concerns. Fretham noted there will be trucks coming and going but that currently there is a fair amount of traffic at that location and this should not be that noticeable. Fretham stated given the distance from the residential homes,the noise should not be an issue. Olson asked if they will be operating during the weekends. Fretham stated he does not know the answer to the question since he does not have that information available tonight and that it is possible the contractor might have to work on a Saturday due to weather. Thiesse stated the crushing activity does not need to occur on the weekends. Fretham indicated he is willing to work with the neighbors' and address their concerns. Fretham stated he is not trying to drive hard bargains and that in his view they can accommodate some of those concerns. Thiesse stated the problem he sees occurring is if the contractor falls behind or wants to complete some work prior to winter and the apple orchard is open. Gaffron asked what type of control they will have over the contractor. Fretham stated they can simply tell the contractor that the site is closed on Saturdays. Gaffron asked what will happen if the City receives a request for the site to be open on Saturday. Fretham stated the contractor could stockpile on Saturday and haul on Monday and that in his view it is not a critical element. Thiesse asked what end date he is envisioning. Page 26 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Fretham indicated he is fine with having the end date coincide with the end of the project along with an annual review. Lemke asked if it would be a deal breaker for him if this interim use would be for the highway improvement project only. Fretham stated part of the issue is about leverage. Fretham stated having an interim use permit and having the right to bring in materials from other projects would help him negotiate with the contractor. Lemke noted one of Staffs recommendations is to limit it to the Highway 112 improvement project only. Fretham stated he does not know if it makes sense to do this without outside materials being brought in. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 8:29 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 8:29 p.m. Thiesse stated as it relates to Item 1,the end date should be upon substantial completion or three years, whichever is sooner. Landgraver stated that sounds good. Thiesse asked if that is substantial completion as stated in the subcontractor's contract. Gaffron stated under the Phase I contract,the permit for the MnDOT site goes until the end of July,2018. Thiesse asked how the Planning Commission feels about allowing materials from other sites to be hauled to the site. Leskinen indicated she is not in favor of taking in any other material. Page 27 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17, 2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to not allow any other outside materials besides those from the Highway 112 improvement project. Thiesse noted No. 3 deals with hours of operation,noise,lighting,etc. Fretham stated he does not anticipate lighting but that it was put in there in case the contractor wanted it so they did not have to come back. Thiesse stated downcast lighting would be no different than a parking lot. Olson asked what the hours of operation would be. Gaffron indicated Orono's normal construction hours are 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. on the weekends. Thiesse and Olson indicated they would like Saturday and Sunday to be off. Fretham stated he is fine with that condition as it relates to the crushing activity. Olson commented traffic would be a concern on the weekends. Fretham noted he would like to be able to use the site for storage and that if the contractor is laying pipe on a Saturday and needs one more piece of pipe,it would be nice if he could retrieve it from the site. Fretham stated it could be limited to no hauling of materials,which would be heavy traffic. Landgraver stated his recollection regarding the concern with the apple orchard is that fall is peak season for them and that he had the understanding the applicant was amenable to restricting traffic on the weekends. Thiesse stated if the contractor is one pipe short of finishing,he cannot see stopping them from getting the pipe. Page 28 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Lemke suggested the hours be restricted from 8 a.m.to noon on Saturday. Fretham stated that would probably be easier. Thiesse noted there would be nothing on Sunday and 8 a.m. to noon on Saturday for retrieving of materials only. Thiesse asked how the Planning Commission feels about Item No.4. Leskinen asked if the public health concerns raised by the Dumases relating to the toxins is something covered by the MPCA. Fretham stated he is sure there is some guideline for it and some agency that would be in charge of it but that he has not come across it in his prior projects. Fretham stated it is probably part of one of the permits they have to apply for. Lemke stated he would assume the MPCA would have control over that. Leskinen asked what items are in place to keep the dust under control. Fretham commented technology has come a long way and that the equipment has spray bars that spray water onto the debris to control the dust. Thiesse noted No. 5 deals with construction of the berm. Fretham stated the berm will be constructed but that he will need to come back for a separate conditional use permit for it. Thiesse stated Item No. 6 is the condition that an annual review of the interim use permit shall be conducted. Leskinen stated she would not mind seeing something more frequent, such as a 6-month review. Page 29 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17, 2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Landgraver commented there might be seasonal issues that come up and that a 6-month review seems reasonable,especially since this is the first interim use permit the City will have issued. Lemnke moved,Landgraver seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. 17-3910, Lake West Development,3245 Wayzata Boulevard West,granting of an interim use permit for staging of construction activities associated with the Highway 112 improvement project,subject to Staffs recommendations and the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 5. #17-3918 REHKAMP LARSON ON BEHALF OF BILL TOLES, 1095 FERNDALE ROAD WEST,VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS,8:43 P.M.—9:02 P.M. Jean Rehkamp Larson,Applicant,and Charles Fendlayer,Architect,were present. Curtis stated the owner of the property is requesting the following variances in order to construct a new residence: 1. Lot area,lot width,lake setback,hardcover within 75 feet of the OHWL, and average lake setback. In addition,conditional use permits are requested for site grading in excess of 500 cubic yards for mitigation of areas of the property below the 1 percent annual chance floodplain and to allow a full bathroom within the proposed detached garage. The currently proposed footprint is depicted in orange and is situated further back from the lake and oriented on the property for improved lake views by neighbors than was the previously approved plan. This property has had a number of variance approvals which are still valid until November of 2017. The original plan is shown in blue on the overhead. The applicants' request for hardcover, lake setback, and average lakeshore setback variances results in the property's inability to conform to the administrative approval provision in Section 78-72 regarding lots of record. Therefore,the area and width variances are also required to develop this property. Page 30 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. The applicants are proposing to encroach as close as 65 feet to the lake with the home where a 75-foot setback is required. It also results in an encroachment of approximately 15 feet lakeward of the average lakeshore setback line. The proposed terraces will encroach as much as 30 feet into the 75-foot setback. The total site hardcover is proposed to be below the allowed 25 percent at 23.4 percent of the 12,990 square feet of proposed hardcover for the site. 2,300 square feet is proposed within the 75-foot setback. The code provides for installation of a bull bathroom with a shower and/or bathtub within an accessory building providing the building is conforming and a conditional use permit is granted. A restricted covenant is required restricting the general use of the building. The applicant is proposing a full bathroom in the upper floor of the detached garage. This building will be used primarily for storage,with the upper floor to the utilized as a yoga studio for the homeowners. The filling activities exceeding 500 cubic yards within the shoreline require a conditional use permit. It appears that 1,200 cubic yards of fill material will be brought to the property. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District will be reviewing the proposed grading and mitigation plan to ensure that the overall volume of flood storage has not been diminished. Staff has conducted an analysis of the practical difficulties and the conditional use permit criteria within Staff report. The Commission or the public can request to review the individual criteria tonight. Staff finds practical difficulties based on the size of the property,the areas impacted by the 1 percent chance of annual flood,the elevation of the property to support the variances for lot area and width as well as the requested hardcover,lake and average lakeshore setback variances for the new home. The applicants have provided a landscape plan which appears to offer relief to the neighbors to the west regarding the floodplain as well as areas of mitigation to limit the impacts of the home on the property. Comments from the public have been received and have been included in the Commission packet. An email was distributed to the Commission this evening. In addition, Staff has spoken with the neighbor to the west at 1101 Ferndale and she indicated that she generally supports the proposed plan but had concerns or questions regarding how the proposed trees and other vegetation planted on or near the Page 31 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17, 2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. common property line would affect the light,air and open space they currently enjoy from their home, specifically from the windows on the east side of the home. Planning Staff recommends approval. The applicants have demonstrated practical difficulties to support the requested variances without generating neighborhood opposition. The proposed landscape plan offers additional infiltration opportunities offsetting the hardcover and structure placed within the 75-foot setback. They have satisfied the criteria for approval of both of the requested conditional use permits. A covenant should be signed by the property owners relating to the plumbing within the detached garage. The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff. Jean Rehkamp Larson,Applicant, stated she is here tonight on behalf of Bill Tores. Larson indicated they have worked closely with the landscape architect to design a house that has a thoughtful scale and broken into pieces so the massing is not large,and is a much more sensitive plan than the previous proposal. Larson stated in their view it does address the neighbors' concerns and creates a view corridor from the Lebedoff s house. Thiesse asked if what would happen if they rotated the house to be more in line with the average setback. Larson stated in her opinion it would create more of an obstruction to the neighbor than it currently does. If the house is rotated,due to the low level of the site,the drainage that occurs on the northwest part of the site would be reduced and it would be harder to mitigate the water. Charles Fendlayer,Landscape Architect,noted the site is a very complex site and there have been a lot of issues with the complexity of how the house is situated on the property. Fendlayer stated this is basically an unbuildable lot. The highest point on the property is out towards the lakeside where there is the ridge at about the 100-year floodplain,which is where the previous home used to sit. Soil boring testing closer to the wetland has found peat and other unstable soils in that area. One of the main requirements and challenges was to mitigate stonnwater onsite. Fendlayer noted they have been working with a civil engineering firm to create a stormwater management plan,which was one of the requirements from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Approximately two-thirds of the site is located underneath the floodplain area and subject to flooding. The proposed design mitigates the same Page 32 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. volume and then some over the requirements of the MCWD. The MCWD has reviewed the plan and have given a green light to proceed forward with the improvements. From a landscaping standpoint,the proposed house is set back from the previous proposal and further away from the western property to help maintain a natural outlet to Lake Minnetonka. The majority of the existing trees on the property will be maintained and additional trees will be planted on the property. The infiltration areas will essentially be one giant rain garden and a good portion of the site will be restored to become a natural meadow to help with mitigation. Fendlayer stated because a lot of the existing site is right at the water table level,there is not much infiltration currently but the prairie should help with that. Landgraver asked if one of the neighbors had concerns with vegetation. Fendlayer indicated they will be working with that neighbor to address their concerns with vegetation but the final plans for the site have not yet been finalized. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 8:55 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 8:55 p.m. Curtis read the following e-mail received from Christopher Jones: "To the Orono Planning Commission Members: I am responding to the Notice of public hearing regarding several properties that directly affect the Long lake and Lake Minnetonka watersheds,and therefore,the water quality of these watersheds. Specifically: 17-3918 seeks variances for lot area,lot width,lake setback, average lake setback,and a 0-75 foot hardcover variance. The details of this request is not included in the Public Notice so it is difficult to assess their individual impacts. Page 33 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Given the low elevation of this property in relation to Lake Minnetonka,and therefore its potential direct impact on the lake's water quality,any variance approvals also must seek to include stormwater runoff remediation through best management practices. This is particularly appropriate for the hardscape variance being sought. Again,because of the property's low elevations, infiltration of stormwater runoff will be difficult,and this fact challenges the appropriateness of any hardscape variance request. Requiring the installation of numerous rainwater gardens using deep root plants is one solution that could mitigate the impact of any variances being sought;there are other best management practices available, too. For example, for every square foot of variance sought, an equal square foot of rainwater garden must be installed. Without this type of trade-off solution building, I encourage the Planning Commission reject the requests." Curtis noted the email also discusses Application 17-3929,and concludes by stating: "I truly hope the Planning Commission will look at these comments as positive and encouraging of the variance process as long as it includes commensurate requirements for water quality protection so that other efforts to return Long Lake and Lake Minnetonka's watershed to a healthier state aren't negated." Thiesse noted the applicant has addressed those concerns and it appears that the practical difficulty has been addressed. Thiesse commented this is a tough site. Landgraver stated one of the practical difficulties is the low elevation of the lot and the plan addresses the overall management of water runoff. Lemke stated the orientation of the house benefits both neighbors. Leskinen stated she likes the improvement over the last plan. Landgraver moved, Leskinen seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. 17-3918, Rehkamp Larson on behalf of Bill Toles, 1095 Ferndale Road West,granting of variances and conditional use permits, subject to Staff recommendations. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Page 34 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. 6. #17-3927 NATHAN AND BETH BRANDENBURG,825 FOREST ARMS LANE, VARIANCE,9:02 P.M.—9:05 P.M. Nathan Brandenburg,Applicant,was present. Curtis stated the applicants' entire home is situated lakeward of the average lakeshore line as determined by the two adjacent neighboring homes. The applicants have applied for an average lakeshore setback variance in order to conduct structural improvements to the upper level on the lake side of their home ahead of the average lakeshore setback line. The proposal includes construction of a 780 square foot expansion over the existing garage within the existing footprint of the home. In addition,a 6' x 7.5 portion of the new second floor area is proposed to bump out over the existing lakeside deck. However, structural coverage and hardcover levels will not change. Staff provided an analysis of practical difficulties within the memo and the Planning Commission may choose to review the individual criteria. The configuration of the property along the channel creates a unique situation regarding the view. Most of the homes are situated primarily toward the channel. The neighboring home to the north at 815 Forest Arms Lane is set back further on their property than the applicants' home. 815 Forest Arms Lane has little to no direct lake views over the applicants' property since their home is oriented to the west. The neighbor to the south at 835 Forest Arms Lane faces southwest toward the channel. Supportive comments from the neighbors were received and have been included in the Commission's packet. Planning Staff recommends approval. The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff. Nathan Brandenburg,Applicant,stated the application speaks for itself and that he would be available to answer any questions. Page 35 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 9:04 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 9:04 p.m. Thiesse commented this is a pretty straight forward application. Landgraver noted the property owners are not increasing the structural coverage on the lot and that some thought was put into the plan. Schwingler moved,Leskinen seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. 17-927,Nathan and Beth Brandenburg,825 Forest Arms Lane,granting of a variance per Staffs recommendation. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. Landgraver noted an email was received from Mike McElligott in support of the proposed project but that he did express concerns regarding the condition of the road. Curtis indicated she did forward the email to the City Engineer. 7. #17-3928 MICHAEL HART,2510 CASCO POINT ROAD,CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,9:05 P.M.—9:13 P.M. Michael Hart,Applicant,was present. Curtis stated the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit in order to conduct grading and filling activities on the property to support the construction of a new residence. The applicant proposes to accommodate a home with a first floor garage. The site currently includes a home with a tuck-under garage. The grading and filling activities will be in excess of 500 cubic yards of material and the property is located within the shoreland. Therefore a conditional use permit is required. Page 36 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. The proposed redevelopment of the property will conform to all applicable zoning regulations and no variances are requested. Staff provided an analysis of the conditional use permit criteria within the memo and the Planning Commission can review that criteria tonight. The applicant is proposing to change the nature of the property to support a different housing style. The proposed housing style is more in keeping with the immediate neighborhood. To accomplish the desired house style,the grade must be adjusted to fill the area previously used as driveway for a tuck-under garage. The proposed home will have a first floor garage elevated above the current grades by approximately seven feet. The City Engineer has conducted a review of the preliminary proposed grading plans and a more detailed review will be performed at the time of the building permit. Additional conditions may be applied at that time. Comments from the neighbors have been included in the Commission's packet. Planning Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit with the following conditions: 1. The City Engineer and Watershed District shall approve the erosion control plan. 2. The street should be swept daily or as needed to keep debris off of Casco Point Road. 3. The applicant must conform to the City's and MCWD's erosion control regulations. 4. Only clean fill is to be imported to the site. 5. Conformance with the City Engineer's requirements at the time of the building permit. 6. Hauling shall occur during allowed construction hours only Monday through Friday 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Page 37 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. 7. The contractor shall post a contact number and able to respond to complaints in a timely fashion. The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff. Michael Hart,Applicant,stated Staff has done a great job describing the project and that he can answer any questions the Planning Commission may have. Thiesse asked if there is room for drainage on the side to keep the runoff off the neighbor's property. Hart indicated there is. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 9:11 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 9:11 p.m. Landgraver commented this is a well-reasoned re-use of the property and that he appreciates Staff's recommendation regarding contractors. Schwingler moved,Landgraver seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. 17-3928, Michael Hart,2510 Casco Point Road,granting of a conditional use permit,subject to the conditions outlined in Staff's report. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 8. #17-3929 KEENAN& SVEIVEN ON BEHALF OF ANTIONETTE BEENDERS, 1669 NORTH FARM ROAD,VARIANCE,9:13 P.M.—9:38 P.M. Todd Irvine with Keenan& Sveiven,was present. Gaffron stated the applicant is requesting approval for replacement and/or reconstruction of deck and pool as well as replacement or removal of existing retaining walls on the lake side of the existing residence. A Page 38 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. conditional use permit is required for grading work as well as variances for average lakeshore setback encroachment and bluff encroachment. There is an existing pool system with an extensive retaining wall system supporting it as well as some decks along the lakeside of the house. The lake is to the south of the house. The proposed work involves replacing the pool,the decks,and adding a second story deck at the southwest corner. The property is a fairly steep lakeshore lot. The house and pool, decks, and walls are tucked into the top of a slope that today is defined as a bluff. Back in 1981,the City did not have a bluff ordinance. The house was built in a location where today it would not be allowed to be constructed. All of the proposed work is more than 100 feet from the lakeshore and appears to be 75 feet from the nearest wetland. Gaffron stated the applicants will be conducting a delineation this spring to determine the exact location of the wetlands. The first issue is the average setback. In addition to the structure and grading within a bluff,the west half of the proposed reconstruction actually is encroaching the average setback line as defined by the house to the west and the house located on the lakeshore to the east. The westerly deck will encroach slightly forward lakeward than the existing deck and patio. The patio area encroachment will be approximately the same or a little less. From a view standpoint the neighboring properties should not be impacted by any additional work performed on the property. The additional encroachment of the deck and pool will be lower than the neighboring house. It is unclear at this time whether that neighbor has any objections to the second story. It should be noted that there is an apparent view easement that was established as part of the original subdivision covenants at the corner of the proposed deck. That easement is not enforceable by the City. The proposed grading within the lakeshore yard would appear to be necessary in order to match the new grades resulting from removal o the tiered retaining walls. Proposed grading plans suggest that approximately 1 to 1.5 feet of fill will be added in an area approximately 40' x 90',totaling between 500- 600 cubic yards. The existing slope in this area is in the 30-35 percent range,while the proposed slope is in the 35-40 percent range. The proposed slope will be more uniform and will smooth out some of the Page 39 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. minor variations of the existing slope. It appears that a few trees will be removed as part of the grading plan. Along the easterly yard,the tiered retaining wall system will be removed in favor of a single wall system. In this area existing slopes range from 18 percent to 36 percent. At the base of the slope is a drainageway within an existing drainage easement. Proposed re-grading after the tiered wall is removed will result in a uniform slope of about 34-36 percent. Grading plans indicate that the drainageway will not be filled or graded. A temporary culvert in the drainageway,however,is proposed to allow construction vehicle access from Long Lake Boulevard. Total fill in this area estimated by Staff is another 500 cubic yards and will range up to perhaps two feet in depth where it replaces the retaining walls. The proposed slope is at the limit of what is maintainable as yard area. The applicants should be asked what they intend for permanent ground cover in those sloped areas. Grading and filling in a bluff area is generally prohibited and the existing structures in this area would likely not be allowed under today's codes. However,their replacement substantially in kind,with only minor revisions to allow for greater safety,would appear to be reasonable and have no additional impacts on the bluff if appropriate erosion control and permanent vegetation measures are implemented. Before the Planning Commission tonight is a letter that was received from Christopher Jones. The letter talks about the fact that the applicants are seeking variances for average lakeshore setbacks,bluff setback variances,and a conditional use permit for grading. Jones states that"The proximity of this property to Long Lake and the slope o the property towards Long Lake suggests that any variance approvals be paired with rain/storm water remediation best management practices." Jones further states that"Long Lake is an impaired lake with phosphorus and other chemical levels that inhibit its ability to recover. Members of the Commission who grew up on Lake Minnetonka in the 1970s will recal what that body of water looked and felt like, and they will likely recall the 'Save The Lake' campaign that began that lake's recovery. That's where Long Lake is today,and that's without the invasive species that compound the problems. Any variances granted to this property/project also should seek commensurate rainwater runoff treatment using rainwater gardens or similar management practices to infiltrate runoff before it reaches the Page 40 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. lakeshore. The pool deck is a hardscape surface that will shed its rainwater to the lake,and employing remediation techniques uphill from the lakeshore towards the pool deck will keep excess contaminated water from a 100-year rain event from the lake." Gaffron noted construction of the proposed retaining walls in excess of four feet in height will require engineering. A stairway adjacent to the easterly pool wall is proposed to replace the existing freestanding step system located further east of the existing retaining walls and the existing stair system extending from the westerly decks. The Planning Commission should review with the applicant what trees will be removed due to the grading plan and whether any additional screening is necessary. Also recommended to be reviewed with the applicant is the plan for temporary construction access from Long Lake Boulevard. In addition,the Planning Commission should discuss the following: 1. Does the Planning Commission find that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner and that the criteria for issuance of variances and a conditional use permit are met? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variances and conditional use permit, if granted,will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose additional conditions in order to mitigate any impacts created by the granting of the requested variances and conditional use permit? Planning Staff recommends approval of the variance for encroachments of the average lakeshore setback as well as for structures and grading work within the bluff. The extent of the grading to be accomplished also meets the threshold for needing a conditional use permit and Staff recommends approval of a conditional use permit for the grading work, subject to the following conditions: Page 41 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. 1. Applicant to review temporary access from Long Lake Boulevard and the temporary culvert through the drainage easement with the City Engineer subject to his approval. No impacts to the drainageway will be allowed. 2. Applicant to provide a vegetation management plan for review by Staff and Council in response to the grading plan that results in unusually steep slopes. 3. Applicant to conform to all MCWD erosion control requirements. 4. Planning Commission to recommend whether any replacement screening will be required. The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff. Todd Irvine,Landscape Architect with Keenan& Sveiven,indicated he would be able to answer any questions the Planning Commission might have. Thiesse asked what size block it planned to be used. Irvine indicated it would be small block. Thiesse asked about access to the site. Irvine indicated it is difficult to access the back area of the property due to the side slopes on the east side of the house. In the past there was access from Long Lake through the property when the storm drainage system was constructed. Irvine indicated there is an opening there currently that they would use to access the site without coming all the way down Long Lake Road. Thiesse asked if he is amenable to a stormwater drainage pond. Irvine stated they have not discussed that but noted they have reduced the actual structural footprint of the property. Irvine stated everything that is disturbed is proposed to be seeded with a low-grow fescue grass that will be mowed occasionally. An erosion control blanket will be placed down to prevent erosion until the seed is established. Page 42 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse asked if the contours on the left side will allow the trees to be saved. Irvine indicated they will be. Irvine noted there are a couple of trees on the survey that do not exist today due to storm damage. In addition,two trees will be removed in the area of the work. Lemke stated his only concern relates to the slope. Lemke asked whether fescue will be enough to retain that slope. Irvine stated it will be and that it is a 2.5 to 1 slope. For every two feet back,the slope will go up,which is a mowable,maintainable slope. Irvine indicated the wall will be engineered. Thiesse stated his biggest concern is also the slope. Thiesse stated placing a foot of dirt on top of a bluff raises the chance for that slope to slide. Irvine indicated the fill will be compacted in lifts as it is brought in and shelfed. Irvine stated there is a 3- tier retaining wall system that is deteriorating consisting of approximately 16 feet of retaining wall. With the slope,the length of the retaining wall will be reduced to ten feet. In addition,the size of the pool and patio space will be reduced. Thiesse asked whether the view easement is an issue. Gaffron stated the private covenant site easement is one the City cannot enforce. If the neighbors or association want to enforce it,that is their privilege. Gaffron stated the City has not heard from the neighbors on this project and that he is not sure whether they have any views of that area or whether they have any issues with the second story. Irvine indicated he did provide a plan and drafted a letter to both neighbors. The neighbor to the west has indicated he is supportive of the project. The other neighbor wrote a note on the letter that said they were in favor of the project as well. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 9:29 p.m. Page 43 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 9:29 p.m. Schwingler stated he would agree with having some type of rain garden there to help mitigate the runoff into Long Lake. Thiesse asked whether there is any criteria for building on a bluff. Gaffron stated because the code typically prohibits construction in the bluff area,there really are no criteria to follow. Gaffron indicated he would want the engineers to take a look at this prior to it proceeding to the City Council but that in his view shelfing the fill makes a lot of sense. Gaffron stated the applicant will need to make sure the drainageway stays open and a location for some sort of stormwater system may be needed to be located at the bottom of that area. Irvine indicated they have submitted a permit application for erosion control to the Watershed District. Thiesse asked whether the applicant has any plans for screening. Irvine indicated it would be grass coming all the way up and that they are not opposed to planting trees in that area to mitigate the loss of the two trees that will be removed. The landscape planting plan between the steps that come down on the right-hand side incorporates vines to help obscure the wall. Landgraver asked if any kind of stormwater management will be done further down the slope. Irvine stated the whole drainageway across this property drains this site as well as the road and that in his view it is not practical to place a rain garden in that area. Irvine stated there might be an option for some stonnwater management in the area of the pool. Gaffron stated that is a good point and that it might not be appropriate to place the burden on this applicant to solve that problem since the hardcover is really not being changed. Page 44 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Irvine stated in his view the size of the rain garden that would be needed at the bottom would be rather large. Gaffron indicated he will ask the City Engineer whether there is something that can be done to improve the situation. Lemke asked whether a more comprehensive landscape plan will be done prior to proceeding to the City Council. Irvine stated they can do that. Leskinen moved, Lemke seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. 17-3929,Keenan& Sveiven on behalf of Antionette Beenders, 1669 North Farm Road,granting of a variance and conditional use permit based on Staff recommendations,with additional stormwater and landscaping information being provided prior to the application going before the City Council along with review of the City Engineer of the drainage plan. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 9. #17-3931 LAKE WEST DEVELOPMENT,LLC,ON BEHALF OF RICK AND BARBARA LUPIENT,PIDS 20-117-23-42-0001/0002/003 (LOTS 1,2,AND 3 CASCO POINT ADDITION), SKETCH PLAN,9:38 P.M.—10:20 P.M. Curt Fretham,Lake West Development,was present. Gaffron stated this is a sketch plan for a proposed two-lot subdivision of a vacant property located at the north end of Ivy Place on Casco Point. The property consists of three existing tax parcels that the applicants propose to reconfigure into two residential building lots, each exceeding the 1/2-acre minimum lot size of the LR-1C District. Gaffron displayed the 1955 plat of the property. In 1955,the northerly edge of this area was a thin peninsula,and the center of the peninsula was wetland. Page 45 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Gaffron displayed some aerial photographs from 1945 through 1975 depicting the property and surrounding area. Gaffron noted by 1960 the area had become filled in a little bit more,and by 1970,it had been completely filled in. By 1971 some volunteer trees have started to grow on the property. Gaffron stated this is a piece of property that has been vacant but has gone through a number of changes. The property was replatted in 1971 from the initial two Registered Land Survey(RLS)tracts into three lots but remained vacant. In 1975, an application to re-plat the property to convert the three lots into just two lots was reviewed. Despite opposition from the neighborhood and allegations that the filling was done illegally,the re-plat was approved with the understanding that the approval should not be construed as building permit approval nor that the land was buildable. The re-plat into two lots was never filed and the property currently remains as three separate vacant tax parcels. The applicants have submitted a fairly detailed sketch plan for review tonight. A tree inventory has been completed for the property. A majority of the trees are volunteer trees of poor quality. A line of huge cottonwoods once stood along the Carman Bay shoreline but were girdled by beavers and eventually were removed. The applicants are proposing to construct two homes on the property. Gaffron noted there are a variety of existing easements that will need to be eliminated. There is also a view easement in favor of the Powell property at 2916 Casco Point Road which limits the number, location and height of the homes allowed. In addition,there are portions of the property located within the floodplain that would need to be filled. The applicants are also proposing an outlot with a driveway as far away from the wetland as possible but still remain within the outlot. The driveway will require a hardcover variance. While eight feet of width is minimal for a driveway serving two residences,that is the maximum width allowed by code within 75 feet of the lake. With the driveway located so close to the lake, it would be appropriate that stormwater management facilities be established to mitigate impacts of runoff from the driveway. Gaffron noted there was a City project completed approximately five years ago to enhance the shoreline in the area adjacent to the lagoon to cover the City's sewer line. An easement was also created for a cul- de-sac on the property many years ago but the cul-de-sac was never constructed. City sewer and water are available to the property. Page 46 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17, 2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. A very small wetland was delineated within existing Lot 3. If it is determined that filling of this wetland is required,mitigation may or may not be necessary. The applicants are well aware that the majority of the property is a filled wetland and likely will require extraordinary measures such as pilings in order to support homes. Each of the proposed two lots exceeds the minimum acreage requirements. Lot 1 consists of approximately 0.6 acres in area and Lot 2,being platted as a back lot given the unusual property shape and access limitations,more than meets the 150 percent lot area requirement at approximately 1.4 acres. Each lot exceeds the 100-foot width requirement. The front/back lot configuration was recommended by Staff as the most conforming method of converting these three lots into two. The existing driveway easement with cul-de-sac becomes a limiting factor for development of the site and cannot be counted towards lot area. In order to convert the three lots into two lots,a new,relocated access corridor to get past proposed Lot 1 is necessary. The Planning Commission should consider the following issues: 1. Applicants should be asked to address how they plan to resolve the noted easement and/or encroachment issues,including the Powell view easement;the potential sewer connection encroachment from the adjacent home at 3560 Ivy;and the deck and driveway encroachments from 3560 Ivy. 2. Does the Planning Commission have any concerns regarding mitigation of the impacts to floodplain,wetlands and trees that are likely with this proposed development?: Site re-grading over much of the property is anticipated with the proposed plan. 3. Access to the property for development/home construction is likely to be very difficult and will likely require heavy vehicles needing to access the property on a very narrow road and minimal accessibility without impacting the immediate neighbor. Contractor parking is likely to be difficult. The impacts to the neighborhood during the construction process,and especially to the Page 47 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. adjoining residence,will likely be extreme. Applicant should be asked to address how these issues and impacts will be mitigated. 4. Does the Planning Commission have any concerns regarding the lot layouts and front-lot/back-lot configuration? The proposed house location on Lot 2 will require re-designation of yards in order to have a southerly setback less than 45 feet. As shown,the setback from that south line is ten feet and Staff would suggest that 15 feet be required per the back lot code if that is considered as a side yard. 5. Does the Planning Commission agree that the average lakeshore setback can be established at seventy-five feet from the lake for both Lots 1 and 2 as part of the replatting approval?? 6. Applicants should address possible stormwater management practices and facilities to be employed both during construction and on a permanent basis. 7. As part of the preliminary plat review process,comments will be requested from the public Works,Police and Fire Departments as to the impacts of development of this property over the short term and long term. Gaffron stated the goal of the sketch plan is to provide the developer with an overview of the pertinent City ordinances and how they affect the proposal. Thiesse asked if that is a nonconforming cul-de-sac as it relates to length. Gaffron indicated he has not checked the length of the existing road to see if it meets City standards. It has been in existence since before the standard existed. Thiesse asked if a conditional use permit for fill is being requested. Gaffron stated it is likely additional such approvals will be required when a preliminary plat application is submitted. Page 48 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Curt Fretham,Lake West Development, stated when they first started on this project, Staff had requested that he obtain a letter from the Watershed District explaining their position on whether this is buildable or not buildable. Fretham indicated he does have that letter and it has been submitted. The second item that Staff requested be addressed was the"mesic oak forest"designation(shown in the Hennepin County Natural Resources Inventory for Orono)which would not be buildable. Fretham stated a tree study has been completed and the property is endowed primarily with box elders,and few if any oaks. Fretham stated in his view they can enhance this property in a number of ways as well as address the neighbors' concerns. Thiesse asked if he is aware of all the easements and can handle them. Fretham stated he is aware of the easements and that they are aware of the view easement which restricts the homes to one level. Fretham indicated he is considering negotiating a payment to the Powells that would allow them some flexibility. Fretham stated he would like to have this move along a little further before addressing that. Fretham noted there are some encroachments from the neighboring property that they are aware of and he is willing to work with them as well. In addition,there are some easements that are in the wrong location and those can be fixed. Fretham stated he is very confident in their ability to sort those out. Lemke asked if any borings have been done. Fretham indicated soil borings have been done and they know that nonstandard footings will have to be done. Fretham stated in today's world with recent technology it is not nearly as complicated as it used to be. Fretham stated they are not planning to drive pilings and can use a more economical method, such as helical piers or screw pilings. Lemke asked whether fill would need to be added. Fretham stated they will need to have some fill and that they would like to raise the grade around the homes one to two feet,with some areas as high as three feet. Page 49 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse asked if the City has any restrictions on screw pilings. Gaffron indicated they do not and that there was a project done six to eight years ago elsewhere in Orono where they utilized screw pilings. Thiesse asked if an eight-foot driveway is the widest it can go. Gaffron stated it is,given its location,and that restrictions will have to be placed on it preventing a future owner from widening it. Gaffron noted there is no way to access the property without a driveway encroaching into the 0-75 setback. Thiesse asked if he has spoken with any of the neighbors about the proposal. Fretham indicated he did speak with two of the neighbors and one of the neighbors had a lot of concerns since it will no longer be a vacant space to run their dog and other things they have done in the past. At the same time,Fretham noted the property has been platted as three lots and has been taxed for a long period of time but the neighbors are aware that things could change. Fretham stated as it relates to the 8-foot driveway,they could possibly do two four-foot sections with a two foot spacing in between to provide a wider driveway. Gaffron stated the City has not allowed strip driveways in the past and that the entire width is counted as hardcover. Thiesse asked if most of the trees will be gone as a result of the fill. Fretham indicated it is likely that most of the trees will be removed but they will be planting better trees with higher sustainability. A tree quality study has been completed and a number of the trees are storm damaged or of poor quality. Fretham indicated they have not created a landscape plan at this point but that they do plan on planting additional trees with some longevity. Page 50 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse asked if he has any concerns about the possible mitigation. Fretham stated they will be doing some floodplain mitigation. Gaffron stated the 931.5 contour is the 100-year floodplain elevation. Landgraver asked if there is a small wetland on the property. Gaffron pointed out the location of the wetland on the property. Gaffron stated it would be difficult to tell that it is a wetland if you were standing on the property. Fretham indicated they are proposing to relocate that wetland to the point. Thiesse asked if they will be bringing any materials into the property across the lake. Fretham commented that might be one way to address some of the construction traffic concerns. Fretham noted the property is two acres and that they can create some onsite construction traffic parking as well to alleviate concerns with neighborhood street parking. In addition,wood chips can be put down on a temporary basis to avoid compacting the ground. Thiesse asked if the footprints shown in the sketch plan drawings are their best guess. Fretham stated in his view the footprints are fairly representative of what will be constructed unless they are required to abide with the one-story level. Fretham stated Staff would like to see a 15-foot setback instead of the 10 feet that is shown,which they are open to changing. Fretham stated it was laid out the way it is because they were cognizant of the neighbor's concerns. Thiesse asked if there is a 15-foot setback required. Gaffron indicated it is 15 feet. Gaffron stated with this type of a subdivision and this kind of an odd lot configuration,the City may need to make some specific yard designations for this site since it will not fit into a specific code. Gaffron stated in his view 15 feet is totally reasonable for that setback from Page 51 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. proposed Lot 1. Gaffron stated he is not sure whether there is any possibility of moving one of the lot lines or putting it at an angle. Gaffron stated this is one of those situations where there needs to be attention to details. Thiesse asked if the average lakeshore setback would be established at the time of subdivision approval. Gaffron indicated it would be, Thiesse asked if the applicant knows what stormwater management will be done. Fretham stated he has an idea of what needs to be done. Thiesse commented the applicant should be aware that he is surrounded by a lake that Orono takes great steps to protect. Gaffron stated as part of a preliminary plat application, Staff will need to know where the fire and police chiefs stand on things,especially as it relates to emergency access and turnaround. Gaffron stated this is an opportunity to resolve some issues but they might not be able to accomplish everything on this property. Gaffron stated if improvements need to be made to the cul-de-sac,the greater question becomes where the land for road or turnaround expansion comes from. Thiesse asked if there is a lift station in the area. Gaffron stated there is a lift station as well as a sewer line that goes along the shore. The applicant will have the ability to utilize that existing line. Thiesse asked if there are any definitions for single-story or whether they would be allowed 14 or 16-foot ceilings with a pitched roof. Fretham stated the language(of the easement) is vague. Lemke commented it would be nice to go above the single story to lessen the footprint. Page 52 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Fretham stated they would like to do that as well. Lemke stated the back to back driveways seem kind of clumsy. Fretham stated the challenge is limiting the hardcover. Fretham stated they have the land mass but it is quite restrictive to run the driveway that far. Fretham indicated they will continue to look at that. Thiesse asked if anyone from the public would like to comment on the sketch plan. Tera White, 3560 Ivy Place,stated their property was developed in the 1940s and that it does flood. White stated as more fill is brought in,that raises a concern about where the runoff will go since they are located at the bottom of the hill. Thiesse stated her concern has been noted. The Planning Commission took no formal action on this item. 10. #17-3932 GORDON JAMES CONSTRUCTION ON BEHALF OF YMCA OF THE GREATER TWIN CITIES, 135 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD,SKETCH PLAN This item was removed from the agenda at the request of the applicant. 11. #17-3922 CITY OF ORONO TEXT AMENDMENT: WETLANDS PROTECTION, 10:20 P.M.— 11:40 P.M. Barnhart stated the wetland regulation was the sixth highest priority identified by the Planning Commission and City Council last year. The Development Process Review Committee has provided some guidance and suggestions for amendments to those regulations. It has been noted by people over the years that the City's regulations are stricter than the Watershed District and that some possible modifications might be in order. The first main area identified by Staff where the City and the Watershed District differ is when wetlands are required to be delineated and the type of delineation. The second Page 53 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. main area is the requirement of a setback beyond required buffer or when no buffer is required. Barnhart noted the City has an additional buffer in addition to the Watershed District in some situations. The goal behind the buffer setback is to establish ground features to help filter the water prior to entering the wetlands. The City also has an additional setback so there is some additional separation. For example,if there is a 25-foot buffer requirement imposed by the Watershed District,the City requires that extra 10 feet in order to provide people some room to move around their house. From a wetland delineation standpoint,the Watershed District makes it clear that a wetland delineation is only required when someone is constructing a new principal residential structure or are doing a project that proposes impacts to a wetland. A true wetland delineation requires field work and a licensed surveyor visiting the site. Normally that delineation cannot be done until May when the vegetation starts growing so the surveyors can observe that,which provides someone only six months to obtain a delineation. there is also a 15-day waiting or comment period on the delineation. The City will require a wetland delineation as part of a subdivision,on a new principal residential structure,a project that proposes impacts to a wetland,or when other rules related to stormwater management or waterbody crossings are triggered. The City also currently requires a wetland delineation when hardcover or grading is proposed within 150 feet of a wetland. The City allows a desk delineation for projects that are clearly not impacting the wetland,which is usually when the improvement is below the wetland and/or separated by extreme distances. Barnhart stated the idea that Staff had in terms of drafting an ordinance was to make the City's rules more consistent with the Watershed District's. A full delineation is required for new principal residential structures, subdivisions,and other projects triggering Watershed requirements. A Tier 1 or desk review delineation may be accepted by the City for all other projects regardless of distance from the project area. If the applicant disagrees with the City's interpretation of the wetland boundary,a full delineation may be provided. Other smaller projects,such as decks or patios,require a verification through a desk review or a Tier 1 review. The second issue that was addressed relates to the buffers. The Watershed District establishes a buffer when a wetland is impacted or when a wetland is downgradient of work triggering the Wetland Protection Page 54 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Rule. A buffer is a no-touch area surrounding the delineated wetland. Additions to existing homes, accessory structures and buildings, etc.,do not trigger the Wetland Protection Rule and therefore the Watershed District does not require a buffer if one was not already established. The City has established a 10-foot setback from the buffer or 35 feet from the wetland edge,whichever is greater. This setback is intended to protect water quality and to separate manmade improvements from the natural features of the land. The ten feet is intended to prevent structures placed in such a way that impacts the no-touch characteristics of the buffer and allows property owners to walk or move equipment between a structure and the buffer. With respect to buffers,there are three primary options: Option 1: Recognizing that the Watershed District's focus is regional and the City's is smaller, retain the existing setback requirements. Make no changes to buffers. Option 2: Recognizing the City's role in water quality protection,yet balance the need for use of land, reduce the setback to 22 feet where no buffer is required or has been established. 22 feet is nine and one half feet more than the shortest possible buffer required by the Watershed District for residential properties. Plus,22 feet is a memorable setback, less likely to be lost in the mind of the applicant,to the benefit of protecting the wetland. Option 3: Completely defer buffer requirements to the Watershed District and remove the requirement of a setback from undeclared buffers and the additional ten feet from declared buffers. Staff does not recommend eliminating setbacks from wetland edges as this would allow an improvement at the wetland boundary,offering no protection to the wetland,or the improvement due to wetland bounce and poor soil conditions. Staff can support a reduction in the setback,which balances the goals of water quality and use of the property. Written comments have been received and are included in the Commission's packet. Page 55 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart noted the majority of the changes can be found on Page 3,Lines 90 through 99,which talks about Tier 1 versus Tier 2 delineations and when those type of delineations would be required. The chart incorporates Option 2 and provides some idea of the impact of the changes. Staff is looking for feedback tonight from the Planning Commission on this item. Lemke asked what constitutes a wetland. Barnhart stated there are several criteria that establish the presence of a wetland, such as the presence of water, soils, and certain vegetation. Those characteristics help establish the type of wetland. Lemke asked whether they could look at the dead vegetation to establish a wetland. Barnhart indicated the vegetation needs to be actively living. Barnhart stated currently the City has a Type I and a Type II wetland. Barnhart indicated he did not utilize that language since the Bureau of Soil and Water has a Type I and a Type II wetland and he did not want to confuse the two. Currently the ordinance allows for a desk review,when those would be used, as well as provide some direction to Staff on how those are employed. Barnhart stated a Tier 2 wetland delineation would be as required by the Watershed District,and as with any decision Staff makes,the applicant can appeal that decision. Thiesse stated it was always his understanding there was a 25-foot buffer and the additional 10 feet was considered a setback. Thiesse stated by going to what is being proposed,the City will need to be more diligent about keeping people out of the buffer. Barnhart stated what is being proposed, starting on Line 115,is changing the distance from 35 to 22. Barnhart indicated there would still be the buffer established by the Watershed District and then adding ten feet of setback. Currently the minimum setback to any building,principal or accessory,is 35 feet and the draft ordinance reduces that to 22 feet where no formal buffer is required. Where a formal buffer exists or is required, it would be 22 feet or established buffer width plus ten feet,whichever is greater. Barnhart stated the effect of the chart on Line 115 is to show the changes from 35 feet to 22 feet. Olson asked if the net loss would be 13 feet. Page 56 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart indicated the net difference would be 13 feet in both circumstances. Schwingler asked why he decided on 13 feet. Barnhart stated the minimum buffer established by the Watershed District is 12.5 feet. Barnhart indicated he took that 12.5 feet,plus a 1-foot setback,and arrived at 22.5 feet,which was then rounded down to 22 feet. Barnhart stated it is important to note that wetland buffer averaging would require approval by the Watershed District and would likely require a formal wetland delineation, so it would not be applicable for a small shed in the back yard. Landgraver stated to his recollection the City had one variance application to the buffer in the past year and that it does not happen very frequently. Barnhart stated if the Planning Commission does not feel there is an issue,it can be left at 35 feet and that the biggest impact would be related to the wetland delineations. Landgraver asked what situations would be exist where the City would impose a former buffer. Landgraver stated his understanding was the MCWD imposed all the buffers. Barnhart stated they do,but that there might be a situation where a property owner constructed a home in 2005 and at that time there was a buffer of 65 feet required. Then in 2017 the property owner would like to construct a shed in their back yard. The City would add ten feet to that buffer from a setback standpoint. Landgraver asked if there is a situation where the City has imposed a formal buffer. Barnhart stated he does not want to say the City has not done that but that he is not aware of any. Landgraver asked if there is any type of quantitative feedback on the current buffer the City has. Page 57 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart stated there probably is a way to equate lake quality and lake frontage and then compare it to other communities but that he does not have that information at the present time. Landgraver stated the City does not have a lot of requests for buffer setbacks and that he is not sure whether Orono should go back to a lower number. Barnhart stated Orono's stance on protecting the water quality does not just impact the wetlands but it also includes the lake yard,the lake,the wetlands,and all of those things that come into consideration. The main impact of the regulation will be for people who would like to do improvements that do not trigger a full wetland delineation by the Watershed District. This ordinance would give them 13 feet of their yard back where improvements can be done,which will benefit the smaller lots more. Barnhart stated the Planning Commission will need to decide whether 13 feet is appropriate. Landgraver commented the desk review is a way to serve the citizens better. Gaffron stated from a practical standpoint,when there is no formal delineation, Staff does not know where the edge of the wetland is and that they are unsure where to start measuring that setback. Gaffron stated that then becomes a functional issue in trying to implement an ordinance. Lemke stated he likes the delineation improvement and that he would prefer to leave the buffer and setback as is. Leskinen noted she has received emails and letters from people encouraging her to vote in favor of Option 1. Leskinen stated the City does not receive very many variance requests to the buffer and that one of the main goals of the City is to protect the water quality. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 10:49 p.m. Justin Kinve, 950 Willow View Drive, stated his neighborhood is greatly impacted by the wetlands and that the draft amendment goes a long way to address a lot of concerns. Kinve indicated he would be against Option 2 and be more in favor of Option 3. Page 58 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Kinve stated when a neighborhood like his is platted and built,the Watershed District comes in and they do the determinations on the wetlands. The Willow View neighborhood was given wetland buffers, which the City has on file. Kinve indicated he is not looking to change any of that. Kinve noted four years ago he ran into major problems attempting to place a small structure in his back yard. One of the issues was that Willow Road was widened,which resulted in more flooding and high water levels in the neighborhood. Kinve stated if he had a delineation done now,he likely would lose more use of his property. Kinve stated since there is already that buffer,he is not sure going back another 10 feet would do anything for people. Kinve stated he would also not be in favor of the house being right up to the buffer setback but that patios,fire pits,or sports courts could be closer to the wetland since there is already that buffer. Kinve stated in general the draft ordinance is a major step forward. Kinve stated his neighborhood has had a ton of problems relating to the wetland issues,and the lack of hearing about it might not necessarily mean it is not an issue simply because people have given up. Kinve stated people have had to spend thousands of dollars obtaining a delineation and six of his neighbors have expressed concerns about the additional setback. Kinve stated protecting the water quality is great and the buffers do that. Kinve stated in his view other structures could be constructed closer to the buffer,especially since the Watershed District allows structures right up against the buffer. Thiesse asked if some of those wetlands were created. Kinve indicated they were and some of them were a result of mitigation. Kinve stated the bigger issue is the current drainage system, which is not working right. Thiesse asked if there is a reason why a platted development with platted wetlands would not govern over everything. Curtis stated that is how the Watershed District treats it but it is not how WACA treats the wetlands. Barnhart noted the Watershed District does not require the setback but it does require a buffer in certain situations. Staff is proposing Option 2,which is kind of in the middle. Page 59 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17, 2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Kinve stated it should depend on the type of structure that is being constructed on how far away from the buffer it should be. Kinve indicated there are water permeable materials that could be used if the structure is being constructed to the buffer. Kinve stated he would like it to be very transparent, and if there are delineations,a person should be able to rely on them for the purposes of planning without having to worry about an additional setback since it erodes a person's use of their property even more. Landgraver asked what he would prefer if he had a choice between having a fixed delineation when the properties are platted plus a buffer or whether it should be more of a dynamic one that can be changed periodically. Kinve stated the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District treats it more as a permanent delineation unless there is a significant change. Kinve stated in his view Option 3 completely aligns Orono with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Kinve stated he is not for incrementalism simply for incrementalism's sake,which is what Option 2 is about. Kinve stated he would not be in favor of having the principal structure right up to the buffer but that other accessory structures could be built right up to the buffer. Thiesse commented the intent of the setback was to allow people some additional space in their back yard but then the setback prohibits them from doing much of anything in that area. Gaffron stated accessory structures could be right up to the edge of the buffer since people probably do not care that they cannot walk around the back of their shed or sports court. Gaffron stated the setback prohibits people from constructing anything in that area. Kinve stated if the principal structure is built right up to the buffer, it is likely people will incrementally move into the buffer. Gaffron noted the City had a 26-foot setback from the edge of the wetland from 1975 until 2005. From 2005 to 2013,there was a buffer requirement plus a setback and the City would determine the location of the buffer. In 2013,the City decided to go with the Watershed District's buffer along with a setback. Page 60 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Gaffron asked whether the Watershed District follows WACA rules. Barnhart stated to his knowledge they do but that he will verify that. Kinve indicated he would be in support of an ordinance that gives the residents guidance on where the lines are so then they do not have to worry about the water level changing periodically. Barnhart stated that is part of the challenge and the reason why delineations are only valid for five years. Thiesse noted the delineation and the amount of wetland were developed for this specific property. Barnhart commented he is not sure what the WACA rules states regarding that. Christopher Jones,2320 Longview Circle,noted he did submit some written comments regarding this issue. Jones stated he would like to commend Staff for their excellent recitation of Orono's history in protecting the water quality of the area lakes and streams. Jones stated what that points to is the fact that Orono really does care about water quality and has taken very proactive steps to protect that so it does continue to preserve the quality of water that flows down the creek. Earlier this evening there were comments made about abdicating the rights,responsibilities,and the power of the City Council and the Planning Commission. Jones stated the ability to control things at the local level, especially as more and more developments take place, is important. Jones noted the purpose of the buffer is to keep large amounts of water from reaching the watershed too quickly and that the City needs to look carefully at any structures that shed water into the wetland regardless if it is a shed or a sports court. If a case by case basis is needed,that option should be made available. Jones stated when it comes to lakeshore property,those property owners should be required to do something to mitigate runoff from going into the lake directly,such as an additional buffer zone or plantings. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 11:13 p.m. Page 61 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Schwingler commented he appreciates Mr. Kinve's experience with this and that he has had several people call and say they wanted the opportunity to have input but they just found out about it. Schwingler noted the Watershed District looks out for the interests of the District and not necessarily the City. Schwingler noted Long Lake has Grade D water quality and Lake Minnetonka is worse than it ever has been. Schwingler stated in his view the City should get more public input. Barnhart stated the Planning Commission could table this item to allow for more discussion. Schwingler commented the discussion should also include Big Island. Landgraver stated his inclination would be to not make a change on the buffers until there is a robust discussion on it and to go with Option 1 at this time. Olson asked what a desk delineation would look like for someone who is doing a major remodel of the house. Olson asked whether a desk delineation could miss some things. Barnhart indicated a full delineation is the gold standard and hopefully will catch everything in terms of the wetland boundaries. A desk review would be a review of the currently available information regarding what the wetland delineation is or the boundaries are in order to measure setbacks. Barnhart stated from a remodel standpoint or a large addition to a home,a full delineation would not be required in all situations and a desk review would be utilized to verify setbacks. If it appears that the building addition is encroaching into the setback,then the resident may have to modify their plans or submit additional information,such as a wetland delineation. Barnhart stated if the concern is that not enough people were aware about the buffer question,that would be a moot point if no changes are going to be recommended. Barnhart stated if the Planning Commission wants to consider changes to the buffer,then it might make sense to split this up into two ordinances and allow for additional input. Dennis Walsh, 1354 Rest Point Circle,noted wetland delineations can only be done from May through October during the growing season,which is part of the issue. If someone wants to do something on their Page 62 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. property,they may be delayed as a result of the need for a wetland delineation,which is part of the reason for the proposed change. Walsh stated as it relates to the wetland buffers,there are not a lot of variances requested or approved since a practical difficulty needs to be demonstrated. Walsh stated it is similar to the 0-75 foot zone in that you cannot build in that zone but you can still walk in that area,but with a buffer,there is also a 10-foot setback added on to that buffer prohibiting structures,which limits a person's ability to use their property. Walsh stated the Development Process Review Committee felt the City should follow the Watershed District's direction on this. Kinve asked whether someone can skate on a pond located in the buffer area. Thiesse commented that is a good question and that he does not know the answer to it. Thiesse stated as far as the 10-foot setback is concerned,it is not a buffer but a piece of land that allows someone to access their back yard. Thiesse asked whether it would alleviate any of Mayor Walsh's concerns if the City opens that setback area up a little to allow more usage in that. Walsh stated he is trying to give more flexibility,which does not mean that he wants people to build right up to the buffer. From a delineation standpoint,the ordinance is attempting to make it a little easier with the desk review for the residents. Walsh stated the Planning Commission should look at whether a setback is needed,and if so,what that setback should be. Kinve commented his position is that the LGU should not rule in this town and that the City should do something to provide that flexibility and allow different structures in the setback. Kinve stated the principal structure should not go up to the buffer. Christopher Jones stated the Minnehaha CreekWatershed District has a regional view and Orono has a local view. Jones stated in his view Orono probably owes it to itself to retain control of its local environment to some extent,particularly in situations where it occurs on a frequent basis or where it might be more appropriate to weigh in at the local level rather than abdicating it to a regional authority. Page 63 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Jones stated if the City does not have the information or the data to suggest why this is a good idea to change, then why change it. Jones stated there could be a lot of unknowns and that there may have been other influences that changed the wetland that had nothing to do with buffers and watershed issues. If there is nothing that suggests that this is a good idea to do other than simply changing it,perhaps opening it up for more discussion is more appropriate than approving it at 11:30 at night. Thiesse closed the public hearing at 11:30 p.m. Olson stated in his view the potential impact is too great to change it and that it might not be worth it to change the buffer. Olson commented Orono has a very local decision making capacity here and they should utilize that. Olson stated in his view there is some way to streamline things and that a fire pit or a sports court could be a variance situation since there could be some practical difficulty associated with those situations. Olson stated he does not feel it is worth changing the buffers due to the potential environmental impacts and that it could be taking a step back. Leskinen and Lemke indicated they are in agreement with Commissioner Olson. Olson asked what the Planning Commission can do if it wants to do something with delineations. Barnhart stated wetland delineations are an issue and that Options 2 and 3 only relate to the buffers. Barnhart stated he is hearing from the Planning Commission that they should move the draft ordinance forward with the recommended changes on the wetland delineations as proposed by Staff and to utilize Option 1 relative to the buffers. Thiesse stated he is not sure if Option 1 is exactly what they want. Thiesse indicated he likes Option 1 but in his view there could be some leniency put in there. Barnhart stated what he would recommend is that the Planning Commission put forth a recommendation on the wetland delineation as proposed and make no changes to the wetland buffer but that if the City Council would like to make changes to the buffer,they could recommend that the Council remand it back to the Planning Commission for further public input. Page 64 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17, 2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse commented he would like to have further discussion on the buffers and get some more background information on why the buffers are the way they are. Landgraver asked if the Council could vote on the buffers if the Planning Commission tables that portion of it. Barnhart stated the Council can change any portion of the ordinance they want regardless if there is a recommendation from the Planning Commission or not. Barnhart stated the only way the Planning Commission could discuss it further is if they table it. Thiesse recommended the Planning Commission choose Option 1 with the recommendation that the Planning Commission be given the ability to make some modifications to allow for some flexibility on the buffer and setback. Landgraver and Lemke stated they do not want to make any changes at this point to the buffer or setback. Landgraver moved,Lemke seconded,Application No. 17-3922,City of Orono,Text Amendment: Wetlands Protections, to recommend the City Council approve the desk delineation process outlined in Staffs memo and to recommend Option 1 as it relates to the buffers. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (Recess taken from 11:38 p.m. to 11:40 p.m.) 12. #17-3925 CITY OF ORONO, TEXT AMENDMENT: SMALL LOTS/SETBACKS, 11:40 p.m.— 12:12 P.M. Barnhart stated the issue of setbacks for small lots within the City has been on the ordinance review list for several years. Last fall the Planning Commission identified this as the fifth highest priority. Barnhart stated included in the Commissioners' packets are three maps. Throughout the City there are lots that have been developed inconsistent with the zoning district. Map A shows all lots that are less Page 65 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. than a quarter area in blue. A number of them are located in the Navarre area. Barnhart stated in those areas the zoning is between 1/2 acre, 1 acre,or two acres. The result is a number of nonconforming lots. The effect on lot owners with nonconforming lots is that a new or expansion of a portion of the structure within the required setback,including an expansion going up,requires a variance. To address the issue,some adjustment of the setback is necessary. The Planning Commission should consider the following options: Option 1. Create a new zoning district for these neighborhoods,establishing unique lot sizes, widths,and setbacks. A new zoning district should be introduced cautiously, as the opportunity for unintended consequences is higher because many sections of the code unrelated to lot size and width speak specifically to a particular zoning district. Staff does not recommend establishing new zoning districts at this time. Option 2. Amend the size,width,and setback requirements for existing zoning districts. This would apply to all lots within that zoning district and could conceivable yield additional density through lot splits. Option 3. Amend yard setbacks in selected districts based on the lot size or width. Barnhart stated in developing a proposed ordinance, Staff examined 36 different lots chosen at random in "hot spot"neighborhoods throughout the City The area and lot width were noted and the side yard setbacks were calculated,either through the survey or by measuring from an aerial photo. Of the 36 lots,23 exhibited non-conforming setbacks on at least one side,and of these,nine had nonconforming setbacks on both sides. Of the 32 nonconforming setbacks, 19 had setbacks less than ten feet. Staff supports an amendment that prescribes side yard setbacks for nonconforming lots due to width as a function of the lot width,proposed to be measured at the applicable lot width. Page 66 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart noted the chart contained within Staff's report provides some examples of the various lot sizes and the minimum setbacks based on the draft ordinance. In addition,the proposed language defining how the side yard setbacks will be measured has been included in Staff's report. The draft ordinance allows for a nonconforming lot to use 10 percent of their lot width as the setback to a minimum of eight feet but it could be whatever number the Planning Commission feels appropriate. Of the 32 nonconforming setbacks,four had setbacks between eight and ten feet. Staff does not recommend establishing a minimum setback less than seven feet since construction of homes from setback to setback is an expected consequence. The proposed minimum will not eliminate variances since some existing homes are less than the minimum called for in the ordinance. Barnhart stated the challenge is to provide the City with a little more flexibility with a minimum level of open space preservation. The Planning Commission should discuss whether a minimum side setback of eight feet in the LR-1B and LR-1C districts is appropriate given open space and massing control goals and whether the proposed ordinance adequately addresses the goals of the Planning Commission and City Council. Barnhart stated relative to the side street setback issue, Staff encounters situations where the side street is unimproved but still requires a large setback. This often results in the vacation of that segment of the right-of-way. Staff proposes language that prescribes an alternative setback if the right-of-way is unimproved to be consistent with the interior side yard setback applicable for that lot. Thiesse asked if the actuals were existing nonconformities originally or whether they were approved through the years. Barnhart indicated he does not know why they built where they did but that some lots are situations where they were nonconforming,the property owner removed the home,and then met the setbacks a little more than what they had originally. Landgraver asked how many of those lots obtained variances. Page 67 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17, 2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart indicated he did not compile that information. Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 11:58 p.m. Amy Nelson, 1180 Arbor Street, stated her lot is actually a conforming lot at 3.4 acres but that it is located in a small lot neighborhood. Nelson stated she is here tonight as a point of clarification as to how this amendment would affect her parcel. Nelson stated what she is hearing is the inequity that is screaming to her. Nelson indicated her neighbor will be able to build within ten feet of the property line but she will never be able to subdivide or build a house that close to the property line even though her property is the only conforming parcel in the neighborhood. Nelson stated in her view this is called spot zoning and everything that she has read says that spot zoning is not very good due to the inequity. Basically the City is granting something to one homeowner by creating and allowing a use that is not allowed by surrounding properties in the area. Nelson commented it is quite ironic that the City is going to take the property that conforms and limit its potential value and is instead taking every nonconforming property and allowing them to basically rezone. Nelson stated it is rezoning even though the City is still calling it the same since they are making it different from any other area in the City. Barnhart noted the City is not rezoning the area and that she would still be allowed to use her property and not go through the variance process as her neighbors have to. Barnhart stated the draft ordinance provides some flexibility for her neighbors to use their property. Nelson indicated she has lived in this neighborhood for 35 years and that she has seen a number of situations where they could not remodel that was aesthetically pleasing. Nelson commented it still seems to her that there is a more reasonable and simple solution,such as rezoning the whole neighborhood to an appropriate designation that is fair to everyone. Nelson stated by doing that,it would also probably address the setbacks to some extent. Nelson stated if they rezone the neighborhood to an acre,she would be able to also share in the fruition of the neighborhood. Page 68 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Nelson noted she spoke with the Council about it this year as well as Staff in years past and that in her view the City is missing the opportunity to address this with the Comprehensive Plan Update. Nelson stated it was suggested to her to wait until the Comprehensive Plan Update but nobody seems to want to address rezoning anything in the Comprehensive Plan because people think it will change the character of the neighborhood. Nelson commented the proposed ordinance will do the same thing. Nelson stated in her view massing will be an issue and is a far greater threat to the character of the neighborhood. Nelson stated she is asking that consideration be given to rezoning her neighborhood. Nelson noted no other house in her neighborhood could subdivide if it is rezoned to one acre. Nelson commented it is likely all of these small neighborhoods have a lot or two that contain a property similar to hers and they would feel like they were not given their full due by creating a situation like this. Nelson requested the Planning Commission reject Option 3 and to create a solution that will be more equitable to everybody. Barnhart noted Option 3 would be changing the setbacks applicable to specific zoning districts and that the ordinance tries to provide some flexibility based on nonconforming lots. Landgraver asked if Option 2 would allow a larger lot to be subdivided. Barnhart stated if the size requirement was changed,the property could be subdivided assuming they have the appropriate frontage. Landgraver commented there are probably only a handful of large lots located in a small lot neighborhood. Gaffron stated the boundaries of the neighborhood should probably be defined before making this type of decision. Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 12:10 p.m. Page 69 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart stated in 2016,the City processed 41 variances and setback variances related to street or side setbacks were included in 19 of them. Barnhart stated surveys for those properties were looked at to apply the new zoning ordinances. One of the properties had a 1-foot setback but most of the setbacks were in the 11 to 25 feet range. Barnhart stated if the new setbacks are applied based on the draft ordinance,the number of nonconformities is reduced from five to two, so there is some benefit to the new setbacks. Landgraver stated in the past 10 feet has been a fairly firm number. Landgraver asked if the changes would be giving everybody two feet on each side. Barnhart stated the minimum setback would be eight feet on each side. Barnhart stated ten feet is appropriate and does not really create a hardship for most property owners. Thiesse stated in his view 10 feet is reasonable. Amy Nelson asked if this would set a precedent so other people in the same zoning district somewhere else in the City would wonder why they do not fall within under the same jurisdiction. Gaffron stated any 50-foot lots would get the same setback. Gaffron stated if the City is routinely giving people variances to a particular setback,it might as well be put into the code. Barnhart stated what he has heard is that the Planning Commission does not want to go less than ten. The draft ordinance is proposing in four different zoning districts some flexibility from the setback requirements if the lot is nonconforming in width. Landgraver stated in his view the discussion by the Planning Commission would be more vigorous if this had been discussed earlier in the evening. Lemke moved,Leskinen seconded to table Application No. 17-3925,City of Orono,Text Amendment: Small Lots/Setbacks. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 13. UPDATE ON CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS HELD ON MARCH 22,2017,AND Page 70 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. APRIL 10,2017 Barnhart reported on the following actions by the City Council: • Approved a conditional use permit for a dock for Alex Ugorets • Approved variances for lot area and lot width in Navarre • Approved lot area and lot width variances for 2755 Ethel • Approved the Birkeland application for side street and lot width variances. The Planning Commission recommended denial. • Approved the Burke application • Approved the survey and site plan requirements ordinance, the ordinance relating to the escrow language,and repeal of CUPs. • The City Council had no concerns or comments on the exemption for the public safety signs. 14. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Barnhart stated Staff has been looking at moving toward paperless copies for the Planning Commission and that they likely will go paperless next month. Barnhart stated the Commissioners will be receiving a computer similar to the one he has. Landgraver asked if there will be a work session in May Barnhart stated at this point no. Barnhart stated given the fact that Mike Gaffron will be retiring in May, he will likely not be introducing any more ordinance amendments. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS None ADJOURNMENT Page 71 of 72 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,April 17,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. Olson moved,Thiesse seconded,to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 12:17 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. ATTEST: Chair Thiesse, Chair Page 72 of 72 Item 2 To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members SLOAt� Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator From: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Development Director �F c';� <1 H Date: May 15, 2017 Subject: #17-3925,City of Orono,Text Amendment Setbacks for small lots Public Hearing Application Summary: The proposed ordinance would impose different setbacks for residential lots, based in part on the lot width. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends adoption of the ordinance as drafted. Background The issue of setbacks for small lots within the city has been on the ordinance review list for several years;for 2017, it ranked as the 5th most important issue. In 2016,the city processed 41 variances of various types; side or street setbacks were included in 19 of them. There are several areas of the community where the development pattern is inconsistent with the zoning district. The attached Exhibit B includes three maps, each labeled individually. Map A shows lots in red that are less than %acre,with clusters of these lots in%2 acre, 1 acre, and 2 acre zones. Map B shows lots in blue betweenY4 and 1/2 acre,with clusters of these lots in acre, 1 acre, and 2 acre zones. Each map includes the zoning legend. The Table below shows the required setbacks associated with lots zoned 1/2, 1, and 2 acres. You will note that approximately 95%of the non-conforming lots are within one of these 4 zoning districts. Front Side Zoning Lot size yard yard Side street District Neighborhood(s) (acres) Width setback setback setback North Long Lake, LR-1A Crestview 2 200 50 30 50 Forest Lake, Kelly Avenue, LR-1B Tonkawa 1 140 35 10 35 Casco Point, Navarre, LR-1C Fagerness point 0.5 100 30 10 15 RR-1B Dickenson, Briar/Arbor 2 200 50 30 50 Originally,the intent with the zoning was to encourage lots to combine with neighboring lots to create larger, conforming lots;while this does occasionally occur, it has not been as common as originally hoped. The result is a number of non-conforming lots. The effect on lot owners of non-conforming lots is that a new, or expansion of a portion of the structure within the required setback, including expansion up, requires a variance. PC Exhibit A 17-3925 May 15, 2017 1 ORDINANCE NO. , THIRD SERIES 2 3 CITY OF ORONO 4 HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA 5 6 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES 7 PERTAINING TO SETBACKS FOR NON-CONFORMING RESIDENTIAL LOTS 8 9 10 THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS: 11 12 SECTION 1. Section 78-1406 shall be amended by adding text to read as follows: 13 14 Sec. 78-1406. —Additional yard provisions. 15 Required yards in the districts specified shall be subject to the following additional 16 requirements: 17 (1) Through lots. Through lots in any district shall have a required front yard on each street. 18 (2) B and I districts: adjacent lots. In the B and I districts, where the average depth of at least 19 two existing front yards for buildings within 150 feet of the lot in question are less or greater 20 than the minimum front yard depth required for the district, required front yards shall not be 21 less than the average depth of such existing front yards; however, the depth of a front yard 22 shall not be less than five feet nor be required to exceed 50 feet. 23 (3) R districts: adjacent lots. In any R district, where the average depth of at least two 24 existing front yards for buildings within 150 feet of the lot in question and within the same 25 block front is less or greater than the minimum front yard depth required for the district, the 26 required front yard shall not be less than the average depth of such existing front yards; 27 however, the depth of a front yard shall not be less than ten feet nor be required to exceed 28 50 feet. 29 (4) R districts: Side Yards adjacent to unimproved rights-of-way. In any residential district, 30 the setback for side yards adjacent to unimproved rights-of-way shall be the same as the 31 applicable interior side yard setback. Unimproved in this section shall be interpreted to mean 32 not improved or maintained by the city or county for vehicular travel. 33 34 SECTION 2. Section 78-305 shall be amended by adding text to read as follows: 35 36 Sec. 78-305. -Area, height, lot width and yard requirements. 37 (a) Height. No structure or building in the LR-1A district shall exceed 30 feet in height except as 38 provided in section 78-1366. 39 (b) Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be observed: 40 Lot Lot Front Side Side Rear Area Width Yard Yard Yard Yard (Acre) (feet) (feet) (feet) Adjacent (feet) to Street (feet) 2 200 50 30 50 30 50 41 42 (c)Within the LR-1A zoning district,the side yard setback for lots that are non-conforming as to their width 43 shall be the lessor of 30 feet or equal to 10% of the Lot Width as defined. However, in no case shall the 44 side yard setback be less than 10 feet._ 45 46 SECTION 3. Section 78-330 shall be amended by adding text to read as follows: 47 48 Sec. 78-330. -Area, height, lot width and yard requirements. 49 (a) Height. No structure or building in the LR-1B district shall exceed 30 feet in height except as 50 provided in section 78-1366. 51 (b) Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be observed: 52 Lot Lot Front Side Side Rear Area Width Yard Yard Yard Yard (Acre) (feet) (feet) (feet) Adjacent (feet) to Street (feet) 1 140 35 10 38 20 35 53 54 (c)Within the LR-1B zoning district,the side yard setback for lots that are non-conforming as to their 55 width shall be the lessor of 10 feet or equal to 10%of the Lot Width as defined. However, in no case 56 shall the side yard setback be less than 8 feet. 57 58 SECTION 4. Section 78-350 shall be amended by adding text to read as follows: 59 60 Sec. 78-350. -Area, height, lot width and yard requirements. 61 (a) Height. No structure or building in the LR-1C district shall exceed 30 feet in height except as 62 provided in section 78-1366. 63 (b) Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be observed: 64 Lot Lot Front Side Side Rear Area Width Yard Yard Yard Yard (Acre) (feet) (feet) (feet) Adjacent (feet) to Street (feet) 0.5 100 30 10 88 15 15 65 66 (c)Within the LR-1C zoning district,the side yard setback for lots that are non-conforming as to their 67 width shall be the lessor of 10 feet or equal to 10%of the Lot Width as defined. However, in no case 68 shall the side yard setback be less than 8 feet. 69 70 2 71 SECTION 5. Section 78-420 shall be amended by adding text to read as follows: 72 73 Sec. 78-420. -Area, height, lot width and yard requirements. 74 (a) Height. No structure or building in the RR-1B district shall exceed 30 feet in height except as 75 provided in section 78-1366. 76 (b) Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be observed: 77 Lot Lot Front Side Side Rear Area Width Yard Yard Yard Yard (Acre) (feet) (feet) (feet) Adjacent (feet) to Street (feet) 2 200 50 30 5-0 30 50 78 79 (c) Within the RR-1B zoning district, the side yard setback for lots that are non-conforming as to their 80 width shall be the lessor of 30 feet or equal to 10%of the Lot Width as defined. However, in no case shall 81 the side yard setback be less than 10 feet. 82 83 84 SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its 85 passage and publication. 86 ADOPTED this day of , 2017 on a vote of ayes and_nays by the 87 City Council of Orono, Minnesota. 88 89 ATTEST: 90 91 92 93 94 Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor 95 96 97 Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of , 2017. 3 1.1e.11.i1>ti., 11.11.IIX11.1/III11IMIMIBMIMIIMPa11MIIMAI 11IM11M11IN11.r 11M11IM11M11IM11M11M11M111111111/111111111111111 � ,11♦IIMIIMMINII11•11•11•11 11.11.11•111.11.11 11\N11�/1NI11� � , 11IM11IM111111IIMINIIIIMII irii ® i PC Exhibit B - 17-3925 , p Ma A ii ---\_ ii _ 'I I I 1' w" l ii Lots less than 1 /4 acre ;N *,y 1.11.11II Jill g - .... j I _ -i ...0„...--. ..,,,,_- . mi, 1 ‘..,. i 'ant for = iliw - _.�u.u.uinun.n J &LI1.L N. I 1, I i �, oning iu.01t� 11 �\ IV-- -� - Business j [_, _ B-1 - Retail Sales ��� il i B 2 Lakeshore 46, B-3- Shopping in Center in ,_.:;, ' \. ..,, `----- . I j B-4-Office/Professional 1 _ Tanae i B-5- Limited Neighborhood - �' e ® B-6 PUD- Highway Commercial 1 Boy Scout i OK`i ` �_ & Ne«enberg 5 Industrial I - Industrial Forest Lake`' �► Brldge 1 ' / r II %i &o �, Recreational �'/� ado+ s�� j RS- Seasonal Recreational - ! 71{ _.• ,4`'�•.��� ! Rural Residential .�� „���,t Arcola RR 1A One Family Rural Residential 5 Acres jDerrrlg ? Coffee ��,� „���,.,'at thdegirea, j RR-1B-One Family Rural Residential-2 Acres Island _ - Bridge ! Lakeshore Residential i i u.n.n1...�11miumit E LR-1A-One Family Lakeshore Residential 2 Acres -„- 4r. 1� �=-.-_, i LR-1B One Family Lakeshore Residential- 1 Acre As 'ap. -, �� ! IFivauaeeae., uanauau.nauaBeau.uaeeavau.naeuuauaueeeu%au.ueeeueeeueeeuaumuananaeunauaneinaneeeumnmuee♦uauaueeeueaueeeiunau.uauweeaueNneeeeau.nnnean.neeen.•eea. 11 6 1 ■ II u \M E1 .'a ., I 4 II II i ii INeanan� Lots 1 /4 - 1 /2 acre - 3 E e �''�. oma••*•y i i ■ •.4 god 'i 0 e \ 84' '�''`•,au: `u _•,.n.eeaee..e.anaee I. �e.uaeei it Ji li „ism li Limn.' \ 1 ' s < _ri,_ oning •\ i ,,. \.. 1 tr ___ Lae ' iu.nm. Business B-1 - Retail Sales i B-2- Lakeshore • B-3- Shopping Center B-4-Office/Professional ■ \- , Tanager i B-5- Limited Neighborhood , C IIII B-6 PUD- Highway Commercial C"---,. , � Boy !ani Industrial :'�. 19 e ',�`• — _ t i Noentaborg 0. �_ `� i I Industrial i Forest Lake II we,4, g,�, Recreational �I' �'�� ll "► - Hii°�""' j RS-Seasonal Recreational 4# II ,�•`� 45,4,x' i Rural Residential i jr ��`• f'*.i,�� A RR-1A-One Family Rural Residential-5 Acres i C ,4` w 44488 i RR-1 B- One Family Rural Residential-2 Acres i Doering 411 pi pis, i Islandill e''°a' ! Lakeshore Residential mai / .` \ LR - One Family Lakeshore Residential -2 Acres see.eeanl......a....e 51 - j ■ 1 A = • j-- - j I 1111 LR-1B-One Family Lakeshore Residential- 1 Acre ■ - - ■ LR-1C-One Family Lakeshore Residential- 1/2 Acre 15 tr� i i �u.eeau.n.ee . .,,, ��.` �� LR-1C-1 - One Family Lakeshore Residential Subdistrict- 1/2 Acre ',�•• .i- -`11' 4'�j ��`e� ��`'♦ Residential • leie �i ��Os l ,fie R-1A-One Family) Residential - 1 Acre j `# i ' ��• "'"°"s MAP to*** I 1 / R-1B-One Family Residential- 1/2 Acre ��• �•,' '� ,�1 Planned Unit Development I .p •. o� e .** ��, • • RPUD- Residential Planned Unit Development 4 '® �,, %mnanan.naa nan. aa nuae►� RR-1B PUD �,�', . PRD- Planned Residential Development q►i 4ie PUD/RR-1B s. uu.u.u..., u.u.u.u.n.0 . .HIN .uu.nain'u.u..mn.n.u.u.in.il..a.u.muniu■erm•You.n.n.n. .u. ..u .u.n.u..uu.nauu.uL'n. ....ii II■mm.u.u.n.�u. III 6 i � 11 ii • r ' M Y i. "-r "liI ii Lots 1 /2 - 1 acre0. 'i ii T O•T 1 1 IF _ .. kjilk ...I... ie.,". .,t..--- --yam van' �p.� 10 t:_r Iiu.u. u.0 _ r. ___________z_ _...............„,_1 v iu.n.L N..\ I. i� .ter � ZI - _ 1 �_ --seOOP ii' IL oning Air ■ 01 �t Business �. J iu.u.,, �� 40,, B-1 - Retail Sales 1141 w Afed B 2 Lakeshore ` • B-3- Shopping Center II 111‘, . B-4-Office/Professional r �, Tanaer ! B-5- Limited Neighborhood ' fm � ill. .WI P. IN �' ., �,a ..,�' a B-6 PUD- Highway Commercial i 40 , �9 l: iis ,�yEVidge .� Industrial II M� � . . ; I Industrial �� end°' - Recreational .4 — j Hendrickson i �.' `, �`� i RS- Seasonal Recreational ! Jr- �� '4"4,, ,, ! Rural Residential .��•�� ��•�„���•t ,�,�,,, RR-1A-One Family Rural Residential -5 Acres "emu , Case ������ d !�„'a��'.',t i RR-1B-One Family Rural Residential-2 Acres ? = Lakeshore Residential I vionimm.m.....limm...0 i LR-1A- One Family Lakeshore Residential-2 Acres I LR-1B- One Family Lakeshore Residential- 1 Acre .,i • i LR-1C - One Family Lakeshore Residential- 1/2 Acre :1 i( "fit- �u.��a.n.n., �i �� LR 1C-1 One Family Lakeshore Residential Subdistrict 1/2 Acre 4�`''��`� R- FaReside1re1 10h. ,i.`�� R FaReside1/ creii, • ��• ‘� `�ott ��•,•, Planned Unit Development �0•, �'�� �.i slit* �� RPUD- Residential Planned Unit Development Z, 'tin.u.n.n.u.u.n.u.u.n RR-1B PUD PRD- Planned Residential Development %• PUD/RR-1B U Ln 4-, N LE rn c� X rM a w PC Exhibit C 17-3925 Lake? Zoning Area Width(Per Def.) New SYS- 1 SYS-2 Comments Address District ZD Actual ZD Actual Minimum ZD Actual Proposed ZD Actual Proposed 2821 Casco Point Rd m y LR-1C 21,780 13,912 100 57 8 10 3.43 8 10 5.6 8 2825 Casco Point Rd s y LR-1C 21,780 13,825 100 58 8 10 9.1 8 10 12.1 8 Garage is 4.9 feet from street PL 2835 Casco Point Rd s y LR-1C 21,780 36,491 100 115 8 10 10 11.5 10 37 11.5 2773 Casco Point s y LR-1C 21,780 10,601 100 120 8 10 10.3 12 10 32.6 12 Garage is 26.2' street PL 2765 Casco Point Rd s y LR-1C 21,780 15,221 100 60 8 10 9.9 8 10 10.7 8 Garage is 13.1'from street PL Survey indicates 10', aerial photo 2755 Casco Point Rd s y LR-1C 21,780 14,871 100 70 8 10 10 8 10 12.6 8 suggests 2' 3475 Livingston s n LR-1C 21,780 6,725 100 50 8 10 6 8 10 19.7 8 Garage is 6'from S2 3554 Lyric Ave s n LR-1C 21,780 13,450 100 100 8 10 5.1 10 10 67 10 Garage is 44'from S2 1565 Maple Place m n LR-1C 21,780 9,148 100 50 8 10 7 8 10 12 8 2740 Ethel Ave m n LR-1C 21,780 9,148 100 50 8 10 7 8 10 7.5 8 2745 Ethel Ave m n LR-1C 21,780 14,810 100 100 8 10 20 10 10 32 10 2725 Ethel Ave m n LR-1C 21,780 7,405 100 50 8 10 5 8 10 18 8 Garage 7.3 from S1 and 0 feet from 559 Park m y LR-1B 43,560 18,000 140 100 8 10 13.5 10 10 47.1 10 street PL 567 Park Lane s y LR-1B 43,560 8,450 140 50 8 10 10 8 10 10.9 8 577 Park m y LR-1B 43,560 8,163 140 49.4 8 10 2.3 8 10 12.7 8 Garage is 4.7'from street PL 559 Park s y LR-1B 43,560 18,000 140 101 8 10 14.3 10.1 10 18.7 10.1 House built in 2015, replaced: 659 Minnetonka Highland L2 s y LR-1B 43,560 50,588 140 164 8 10 21 16.4 10 21 16.4 4125 Highwood s y LR-1B 43,560 27,483 140 135 8 10 47 13.5 10 50 13.5 4125 Highwood m y LR-1B 43,560 27,483 140 120 8 10 31 12 10 46 12 Rebuild 2003 4149 Highwood s y LR-1B 43,560 10,268 140 42 8 10 2.4 8 10 15 8 4156 Highwood m y LR-1B 43,560 11,083 140 40 8 35 3 8 10 6 8 Firelane on SY1 4109 Highwood s y LR-1B 43,560 15,445 140 95 8 10 8 9.5 10 8 9.5 315 Crestview s n LR-1A 87,120 15,030 200 120 10 30 21.6 12 30 63.5 12 884 Dakota Avenue s n LR-1A 87,120 30,650 200 104 10 30 27 10.4 30 53 10.4 888 Dakota Avenue s n LR-1A 87,120 16,108 200 66 10 30 16 10 30 20 10 1540 Long Lake Blvd s n LR-1A 87,120 27,967 200 158 10 30 48.6 15.8 30 50.3 15.8 1525 Long Lake Blvd m y LR-1A 87,120 10,029 200 101 10 30 8.9 10.1 30 13.6 10.1 1535 Long Lake Blvd m y LR-1A 87,120 9,462 200 64 10 30 10.5 10 30 9.39 10 Adjacent to a Fire Lane (SYS 2) Detached agarage 3.5 from front 1525 Long Lake Blvd s y LR-1A 87,120 15,999 200 96 10 30 18.9 10 30 27.6 10 and 1.5 from SYS 1 1520 Long Lake Blvd s n LR-1A 87,120 9,039 200 61.6 10 30 12 10 30 7 10 Neighbors home is 2 feet from PL 1680 North Farm Road s n LR-1A 87,120 84,774 200 200 10 30 32 20 30 87 20 1650 North Farm Road s n LR-1A 87,120 87,142 200 200 10 50 60 20 30 112 20 Three sides ROW 1709 North Farm Road s n LR-1A 87,120 108,620 200 205 10 30 40.3 20.5 30 62.29 20.5 1365 Arbor s n RR-1B 87,120 7,000 200 80 10 30 18.4 10 30 34.3 10 Garage is 4.6'from S1 1270 Arbor s n RR-1B 87,120 14,774 200 99 10 30 15.6 10 30 56.4 10 Garage is 1.8'from S1 1295 Dickenson s n RR-1B 87,120 13,500 200 100 10 30 13.9 10 30 56.8 10 537 Hanlon s n RR-1B 87,120 19,385 200 150 10 30 16.3 15 30 85 15 Remaining nonconformities 23 14 9 6 Lot is< 1/2 of lot min. Setback is less than 10' o a ,,, PC Exhibit D I" rn w 17-3925 m U r, d .-I 2016 Variances Address B C D E F G HI J K L M N 0 _ 1 2016 Variances Case Zoning Area Width SYS-1 SYS-2 Comments , 2 Address No. District ZD Actual ZD Actual Existing Actual Existing Actual 87,120 56,846 200 49.8 30 50 Flag Lot. Garage improvements, 3 2060 Spates 3799 LR-1A 30 50 garage is 4.2'from PL 4 865 Ferndale 3839 LR-1A 87,120 21,790 200 102 30 1 30 10.2 87,120 144,597 200 140 30 30.2 5 1380 Orono Lane 3876 LR-1A 50 54.3 Variance for accessory structure 87,120 18,793 200 150 30 53.8 Proposed minimum side street of 6 230 Tonka Ave 3880 LR-1A 50 40 25 7 2188 N.Shore Drive 3798 LR-1B 1 as to area and width 8 1991 Fagerness Pt Rd 3835 LR-1C ,as to area and width 21,780 21,149 100 140 30 65 9 2413 Carmen St 3851 LR-1C 15 45.2 Variance for accessory structure 21,780 21,044 100 330 10 215 10 1920 Fagerness 3866 LR-1C 10 19.1 Street setback of 22 feet,from 30' 11 1255 Dickenson 3830 RR-1B 87,120 13,503 200 100 30 13.9 50 20 Side street adjustment 12 570 Orono Orchard 3837 RR-1B 87,120 26,711 200 100 30 17 30 17 Variance of 17/15 denied 13 1240 Arbor 3845 RR-1B 87,120 16,796 200 100 30 25 50 23 14 80 Smith 3873 RR-1B 87,120 38,148 200 160 30 11.8 50 80 15 570 Big Island 3849 RS New Ordinance applied Address B C D E F G H I J K L M N 0 16 2016 Variances Case Zoning Area Width New SYS-1 SYS-2 Comments 17 Address No. District ZD Actual ZD Actual Minimum Ord. Actual Ord. Actual 18 2060 Spates 3799 LR-1A 87,120 56,846 200 49.8 10 10 50 10 50 19 865 Ferndale 3839 LR-1A 87,120 21,790 200 102 10 10.2 1 10.2 10.2 20 1380 Orono Lane 3876 LR-1A 87,120 144,597 200 140 10 14 30.2 30 54.3 Side Street 21 230 Tonka Ave 3880 LR-1A 87,120 18,793 200 150 10 15 53.8 15 40 Unimproved Side Street 22 2188 N.Shore Drive 3798 LR-1B Conforming as to area and width No adjustment 23 1991 Fagerness Pt Rd 3835 LR-1C Conforming as to area and width No adjustment 24 2413 Carmen St 3851 LR-1C 21,780 21,149 100 140 8 8 65 15 45.2 Side Street 25 1920 Fagerness 3866 LR-1C 21,780 21,044 100 330 8 10 215 10 19.1 26 1255 Dickenson 3830 RR-1B 87,120 13,503 200 100 10 10 13.9 30 20 Side Street 27 570 Orono Orchard ' 3837 RR-1B 87,120 26,711 200 100 10 10 17 10 17 28 1240 Arbor 3845 RR-1B 87,120 16,796 200 100 10 10 25 25 23 Side Street 29 80 Smith 3873 RR-1B 87,120 38,148 200 160 10 16 11.8 30 80 Side Street 30 570 Big Island 3849 RS Not included Item 03 Date Application Received: 04/17/17 O Date Application Considered as Complete:04/17/17 A/O 60-Day Review Period Expires: 06/17/17 To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members yF Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator �kESHo�� From: Melanie Curtis, Planner mcc Date: 15 May 2017 Subject: #17-3934,Jim Kirkland, 1955 Shoreline Drive, Variances Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting variances in order to install a new monument sign. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. Background The property is a marina.They have had an existing free standing pylon sign identifying their site since the late 1980's/early 1990's. The current owners refaced the existing sign when they purchased the property as new pylon signs are no longer permitted. At this time they wish to remove the outdated pylon sign with a new low-profile stone monument sign. Variances are requested for setback, hardcover, and height from grade. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-3672,78-1468,&78-1279-Setbacks: B-2 Required Proposed Street 10' 3' Lakeshore 75' 60' Applicable Regulations: Sign Criteria—Minimum Clearance from Grade Variance (Section 78-1466) The applicant is proposing a low-profile monument sign which will be a total of 40-inches tall. Because their goal is to keep it low,they are requesting variance from the ground clearance requirement for the sign copy area. The code requires a minimum of 20 inches of clearance from grade for the sign copy area,they are proposing 16 inches of clearance.The 20 inch requirement is to facilitate placement of plantings around the sign. Street Setback Variance (Section 78-1468) The applicant is requesting a variance to permit the new Monument sign to be located 3 feet from the street property line where a 10 foot setback is required.The sign will be 20 feet from the fog line on Shoreline Drive. Lake Setback& Hardcover Variance (Sections 78-1279&78-1680) f FILE#17-3934 15 May 2017 Page 2 of 4 A majority of the improvements on this property are within the 75-foot setback from the lake, consistent with the use of the property as a marina.The proposed sign will be located 60 feet from the OHWL where a 75-foot setback is required. A variance allowing 15 square feet of hardcover is also requested. Governing Regulation:Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn.Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2,when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.537 Subd. 6(2)variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance.The variances requested are consistent with the general intent of and are in harmony with the Ordinance. The lake setback and hardcover variances are reasonable and necessary as the majority of the property is within 75-feet of the lake.The signage is proposed as far from the lake as can be reasonable and still be functional. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.The variances resulting in a permit for construction signage supporting a marina within the commercial marina zone(B-2)are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The request to permit construction of a sign within the lakeshore setback appears to be reasonable. Also reasonable is that the sign proposed is low profile and will result in a minimal handover increase.The area available to locate the sign is narrow and the encroachment to the street setback is reasonable considering the 20 foot setback from the traveled roadway. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The property owner purchased the marina after it had been developed and the site layout is existing.The property owner did not create the circumstances. and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The requested variances will not alter the character of the neighborhood.The lake setback and hardcover variances are reasonable and necessary as the most logical location for the entry signage is near the read and within the 75-foot setback of the lake. FILE#17-3934 15 May 2017 Page 3 of 4 Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems.Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06,subd. 2,when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78.This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.This condition is not applicable,as the use for signage is an allowed use in the B-2 District. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling.This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.The location and nature of the property necessitate the proximity to the lake.The need for identification, parking,and vehicle maneuvering on the property creates increased difficulties which drive the sign location and improvements toward the road. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located.The marina property is generally unique in the immediate neighborhood. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.This statement is true. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health,safety, comfort or morals,or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter.This statement is true. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty.The size of the Property;the proximity to the lake and County Road 15;the need for site identification and access create practical difficulties affecting the Property;the variances are necessary and not merely serve as a convenience to the owners The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Practical Difficulties Statement Applicant has completed the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Practical Difficulties Analysis Staff finds the site's orientation squeezed between Shoreline Drive and the lake serve as practical difficulties supporting both setback variances as well as the hardcover variance. Additionally the width of the shoulder supports the installation of the low-profile monument sign within the required setback.Although the sign will be 3 feet from the property line it will be FILE#17-3934 15 May 2017 Page 4 of 4 10 feet from the "curb"and 20 feet from the fog line. The ground clearance requirement conflicts with the applicant's desire to have a low-profile sign. A fence located at the same setback could be 42 inches tall,the sign is proposed at 40 inches. Public Comments Hennepin County has submitted comments relating to the sign location and expressed no concerns (see Exhibit H). To date, no additional public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Proposed Survey/Site Plan Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit E. Material and Plant Details Exhibit F. Aerial Photos Exhibit G. Comments from Hennepin County Exhibit H. Property Owners List Exhibit I. Plat Map PC City of Orono Exhibit A Variance Application #17-3934 O Street Address: Application# / -7�r 2750 Kelley Parkway O ` �O Orono,MN 55356 Date Received: i _ -. Main: 952-249-4600 Staff: &(G fax: 952-249-4616 y j Mailing Address: Fee: $700 /x-1 c'• N >C`)('``_ P.O.Box 66 Escrow: e• �,' o Crystal Bay.MN 55323-0066 $700 / (�� �' 9 ltEs Hi&- Notes: Please complete. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agenda. SITE LOCATION: /9 Ss' 6atiozzL//Va. ttR.IVit. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: £N7Rrtive-f . 5/44 4,1Er► /301e-i< (attach additional sheets as necessary) APPLICANT INFORMATION: )' check here if Applicant address should be user or billing Applicant: / minty'« Smolt'', mAgem/4 girM�17 A4y ..774,1„ k,A,t .4-rvob Phone(Primary): 46I. zge .qsi7Z Mailing Address: /96-6. S/yp ,, jj iyir._ City: O 0/1ia ZIP: 6-6-39/ Email: , y j Al a y1 Shot ae-r.i.1(L. A,.dlM/% PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: jrcheck here if Property Owner is same as applicant 0 check here if Property Owner address shout be used for billing Name: i►✓a7' Sy� Ai£` A#4 5m•TICS SAy ...Thi Arlicet. A,6 Phone(Primary): a! • Zcel • 9Y72 Mailing Address: _ It 6's" 414a/Lirgi _ Vit_ City: �p/uQ ZIP: !,�-S59/ Email: j;N'1 flarbio.e%i M r, 4yr APPLICANT AND/OR PROPERTY OWNER: 4 Certify that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant and property owner recognize that they are solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so,the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of Its potential merit. • The Property Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff,consultants,agents,Commission and Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. • Property Owner and/or Applicant acknowledge they must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or property owner is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant/owner and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. • Information will be distribua email. Applicant Signature: 40, AM>.• / Date: VA /Z,/ Applicant Signature:g Date: Property Owner Signature: Date: 7/i /zD,7 RECEIVE) Property Owner Signature: Date: APR 1 7 2017 Variance Application—January 2017 Page 4 3934 CITY OF ORONO DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY In accordance with Minnesota State Statute 13.04 Rights of Subjects of Data, Subd. 2, "Tennessen warning", we would like to inform you that your request for a permit or license from the City of Orono or any of its departments may require you to furnish certain private or confidential information. You are notified that: 1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. 3. The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permit or license. 4. If your requested permit or license requires Council action to approve, some information may become public. 5. You have certain rights under Minnesota State Statute 13.04(see following page)to review private data on yourself. 6. Your full name Is required to process this application or permit. fo g tcKL_r44aD First Middle Last /q5s s0r0—hi3O‘4,- )R1 ivy Address GREW* I41J J Sri? City State Zip Phone I understand my rights as stated above. -41 ;111116. ig RECEIVED Variance Application—January 2017 APR 1 r 2017 X14 # 393 `CITY of oRONo PC Exhibit B - 17-3934 PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION 1.) We are requesting a variance from the Code for the location of an entry monument sign. The Code requires a ten-foot setback from the property line; we are requesting a three-foot setback. The purpose of the variance is to allow us to create a sign which is clearly visible and also allows us to preserve space on our narrow sight for operations and parking. We are also requesting that the sign copy be allowed to start at 16"above ground level, instead of 20"called for by the Code. 2.) Our difficulty is due to the fact that our property is narrow and tight, located between Lake Minnetonka and Shoreline Drive. 3.) The variance would permit us to install a sign that would enhance the essential character of our lakeside site. If the variance is granted and we are allowed to install the proposed sign,we would remove our existing,overly large sign which detracts from the character of the site. (see photo) 4.) Economic issues are in no way a consideration in our request. 5.) Our primary difficulty is our small,tight site and limited space for parking and operations. We would be required to give up parking area in order to comply with the Code. 6.) A monument entry sign is allowed in the B2 Code. 7.) N/A 8.) Our site is peculiar because of its location between the Lake and Shoreline Drive. 9.) (same as above) 10.) Having a visible, aesthetically appropriate entry sign is important to our business and to the community. 11.) The proposed sign and its location are in keeping with the safety and comfort intents of the Code. The new sign will greatly improve the streetscape as compared with the present sign. 12.) It is necessary for our business and for the community to have a visible and appropriate entry sign. NOTE: Because there is a wide, paved shoulder on Shoreline Drive in front of our property,the distance from the white("fog") line of Shoreline Drive to the face of our proposed sign is approximately 20 feet. Installing the proposed entry sign is in keeping with our efforts to be respectful and contributing members of the community,as demonstrated by our ongoing efforts to improve the appearance of our property and our recent granting to the City of Orono of an easement for electric generator equipment. RECEIVED APR 1 7 7017 3934 CITY OF ORONO SURVEY ITEMS PER SCHEDULE B: BOUNDARY SURVEY FOR: E / ITEM& Rights of the public and Hennepin County in regard to the right of way of Hennepin N S M S B, LLC P e County Stale Aid Highway No.15,arising out of Hennepin County State Aid Highwoy No.15, \ / Plat 51,filed February 5,1982,as Document No.1457512.Said Highway Right-of-Way plat affects the subject property m that the south line of said County Stole Aid Highway No.15, •eye 4, 0 Exhibit C Is the northwesterly boundory of the subject property. M4• ITEM St Terms d conditions of Slate of Minnesota Protected Waters Permit No.87-6294, AS '�' ,�•`` / LEGAL DESCRIPTION: #17-3934 dated July 27,1987,filed September 17,1987,as Document No.1872718.Said Permit '40.4p, .. Tract 1: •xpkad November 30.1987. �•p • Pen 1:That port o1 Gowmmenl Lal 3,Section10.TomMp 117.Rduye co vreu lieu ronows. ITEM 1Q Terme ond conditions of City of Onono Resolution No.3478.Ned August 23.1995. '-77 Commencing°t the kitereoctian of the North line of Central Avenue in tins VAloge of Cryetd Bay, as Document N.2831633.Said Resolution provides a variance for the placement of a \ V/'// ♦ I. 5�1, `© Minnesota oe shown in the Plot of"Aa Park"on Lake Minnetonka extended Easterly with a line storage module on the subject premises. 4..4. ` drown parallel to the center fine of powd Highway No.7 and 33 feet Easterly at right angles w / �����a�kM1� therefrom;thence Northeasterly 42 Degrees 15 Minutes East along a line parallel to the center the ITEM 11: Terms and conditions of City of Orono Resolution No.3371.Ned August 23 1995. 3 .a 0` of said paved Highway 120.5 feel to the point of the beginning of the bnd to be descrbed,thence os Document No.2631788.Said Resolution subjectpropre en wnmdment to the variance for the \ , °.}•���?M1' South 57 Degreee 45 Minutes East 29.4 feet,thence North 37 Degrees 50 Minutes East feet to placement of a st«age module on the promisee.Said variance proNtles f«thet4,.<,,' the intersection of the North line of Grand Avenue extended Easterly,thence North 59 45 O 1t' ` /y ' Minutes West dont'said North One 18 feat to the intersection with said pordlet line oboes relocation of sold storage module. / et' O P\k°!p // mentioned,thence Southwesterly along said parallel line South 42 Degrees 15 Minutes West a ITEM 12: Tums and conditions of City of Orono Resolution No.3582.Ned September 10, distance of 131.5 feet to the point of beginning. 1996. s Document No.2741302.Said Resolution grants a conditional use permit to Blow P / boat Nub use on the subject premises. g,. 'j -- Par 2:That part o1 Government Lot]and accretions thereto,Suction 10,Township 117,Range 23 ITEM 13: Proprietary and sovereign rights of the Stale of Minnesota in all that portion of I ( ' described as follows: Commencing at the intersection of the North line of Central Avenue as Mom \L- / 0 20 40 60 in the plot of'Oro Pont(on Lake Minnetonka extended Easterly with a line drawn parallel with the the land lying below the natural,ordinary high water mark of Lake Minnetonka;not Intending \ / �O4*,-e .r= / a ter center line of paved Highway Number 15 and 33 foul Easterly at right angles therefrom;thence however to deprive the fee owners of the usual riparian rights that attached to the land Evil. _f/ _V „1 Q'� I= MB li North 42 degrees,15 minutes East along a line parallel with the center line of said Paved highway riparian to a navigable,public body of water incident to the ownership thereof(os to Parch T'/`\ //yA� c 1 �6Fg�"w,p,, 120.5 feet thence South 57 then degrees 45 minutes East,29.4 feet to the actual point of beginning 2 of Tract 1);which aopmre are a recital on Certificate of Title No.816976. <�\ / vv`• 6d, �V 4nr 1 •I 4th.4, of the land to be described:thence South 57 degrees 45 minutes Cost to the shore of Loke ret• SCALE IN FEET Minnetonka:thenen Nenth Northeasterly,Northerlyos and Northwesterly plat slang said shore to Its r , 1P intersection with the Nath line of Grand Avenue°s shown on the plat of'Oro Park'On Lake SPECIAL NOTE: - `v-- �s _- ;4p..,4 ' • DENOTES FOUND HENNEPIN CO.ROW MONUMENT Minnetonka extended Eaeterig then.along war extended line Northwesterly to its Intersection with ��\ / ` r a Tina drum North 37 degrees 50 minutes East.to through the octad point of beginning. the•Nonce The hatched area Mown hereon is depicted upon Hennepin County Half Section Maps w JSouth 37 degrees 50 minutes West-lo-the actual point of beginning,according to the Government being apart of the surveyed premises and the Hennepin County Property Information `2u.• ''1/4.---\e$ ?j • DENOTES FOUND IRON MONUMENT Surrey thereof. few' / i Database lista the hatched portion as being contained within Parcel Identification Number .w` `v .�� / 0 DENOTES MONUMENT SET AND Certificate of nue No.816976 10-17-23-42-0024.Said hatched area Is not contained within the record legal ��pp 44,0- 1 MARKED BY LICENSE NO.44123 Twort 1' tlesaiptiona are provided to the surveyor. \ Q"�4r / p \ .% •\ 'ice 4,44t, Thane ie curtently a proceedings subsequent la inflial registration on this parcel with the \ %�l$' / 'y , i'._ 4�7 �'' .s?4 N4zls•OOT(Dao)BEARINGS SHOWN WITH DEED IN PARENTHESIS Par 1: That Part of Lake Street as Mown in the plot of'Oro Park'on Lake Yinnotmka described intml to add saitl parch to the current cartlflcals of tills. / PO�y SiV\ y. •f ''''(*E1,,,,,,,;,,,....,,, p•' as commencing of the intersection of the North the of Control Avenue in the City of Crystal Bay, \ ..,NNenp.. • Chu ARE THOSE RECITED WITHIN LEGAL Minnesota as Mown in the Plat of'Q°Pork'on Loke Minnetonka extended Easterly with°line �Q�,Y OxOr ,Sb� \_ _ --_ S •••••' Ec"(�. 'S DESCRIPTION PROVIDED her h arallel to the center line of the baing the point o/beginning of the aved HPO to be described.thenNo.7 ond 33 t.allorMwateat rly rightangles / , / ( degrees.15 minutes East°long said parallel line to the center line of said paved Highwoy 120.5 ` 4'.(t' / c��,(4A k.r • 919''15 i t.thence South 57 degrees 45 minutes East°distance of 29.4 feet.thence South 43 degrees • 30 minutes Weal 116 feat to the intersection with the North Tina of Central Avenue extended, 0. 4 4 t w kC thence along said extended line North 68 degrees 27 minutes West a distance of 27.8 feet to the / •.� O♦ ,,\r 4.(4 /� �lR,{� k ®® ��gj point of beginning. ��pp4�//�•'�/ .f PAYERS Por 2:That part of Government Lot 3,Section iQ Township 117,Range 23,described es ill• E4'N' !I{Avw/J// k0. vs,!'�` `a - - '•'•. --_ commencing of the Intersection of the North line of Central Avenue in the Village o/Crystal Bay, / e J 4/ __11V00 000090-- • Minnesota.as shown p the plat of"ora P«k"m Lake Minnetonka,extended festally with a line rJ\ / drown parallel with the centerline of paved Highway No.15,formerly Highway No 7, d 33 feel l ?� /:' ''rte- Easterly of right angles therefrom,then.North 42 degrees 15 minutes East Bang sola parallel line ` ` If4{it le ': --. r �' I "•� `` 120.5 feet.thence 57 degrees 45 minutes East distance of 29.4 feet to the point of h ,¢ YYY beginning of the land to be described,thence South 57 degrees 45 muulm East to the Shore of / 6� �� S ` f t - I 44e• Lake Minnetonka,thence Southerly,Southeasterly and Northwesterly dpg said More to Its ,(y K.11 intersection with the North line of Cmtr°I Avenue extended:thence along said extended line North \`‘`-) it?`1' + {7'J1k't'` ,yam ` -i 68 degrees 27 minutes West to an intersection with a Ilse drawn South 43 degrees 30 minutes ( C 4)`'I • 4/ .�k 1'� �y�y} 't O West through the point of beginning,thence North 43 degree.30 minutes ford too point of `/c ,>/` r-r �k�'� a, (� P =11.1 SEAWALL SEAWALL beginning,act«dug to the Government Survey thereof. C‘.(11 ("'`x / \ ,L J•J V�,e 7 IL METAL COVERS �•% P:AROEL 2 t ., Certificate of nue No.816977 J\C�<\\`J / y` y. .,4 (POSSIBLE NEL TANK) %. Vmi a- ' r l > N. ��J °(J •/ dd?�°J r 1 / . fR7L00ELWRG-- / • • E-,,,,„,,, ,,,..•,,„il /` �4,, 4`,.4 E / \ SUS,qQ r 4'rR,�qS qMn�� / • �1. :2"„b A ro y So ck- k' E=` y 4a 1;L / Cr>, \ rr` ter_ • ``• • • \if r"L"`�'iP /NB�16'S�r e, '1T/EJ i ,(Y4 1' / ()` 'V'�7e E '4}- 1 r>q•W4n'01•goST 1/ `sa, 1Fr~y�1f• �_� ' le r \ • / , AO • TRACT 2Jam=. spgT ../..,..:1/ V fee-4.P SEAWALL '0, // q F Fs \/ / ! PARCEL 2 • I\�'itr ; �k �P A ',MIL. \�� J/ f 4�C w Z DpLK _ .r y 11.1/\ A0 / '<"- J• 64,'tits. LEGEND lc dr\a`AP�\ • v�t+�vw _ i��Sii/�7 qc ., • ® AIR CONDITIONER 1 Y•x;,11 C_ SG'. 507ER ELEVATION=(9300 NCVD29) • I ELECTRIC Box 1 P. AS LOCATED ON YA23 2011 • �i/j�������'"1..��`��� illlll//l��"_.... ., � A _WN 4 o UTIs wE POLE • ��ll�i �ij'/ l s/i - t, 1° amiW' \ -x-x x- •-•7,..-............`_ FENCE • 4lr��s ///////�ft • _ `Y' NtwD DECKrNc--., • • r �(/� ��o W w WEu s=! wut V MANHOLE / /P 20yp,fC',1°,tek. 1 / `\ =; • • bfi7 ® ELECTRIC METER / O!TQ; �4•1K- - NEA _ • ` _ CO CX ,y. \ rj • tW7pp POST Mol ROPE STYLE FENCE T' E P _J • d' CAS PUMP. V`` !d�' 16 • O E))4 OVERHEAD WIRE 23-JT // ``Y4is (Y /`�E ROPO /- r V * UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE rOM•'9°pQ; S2 S�qs k' Cf'[pE ic� 4'44.077.0y • • `r 4 "49 -0- UNDERGROUND GAS 7rr4Y T T G1, • P ` 4, UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC 2•t'0 J 2i7/r(A_A 4 1 • V art% I I BITUMINOUS SURFACE NOTES: c V 4 BZy \r �, i CONCRETE SURFACE 1. The orientation of this bearing nptam is based on the Hennepin County coordinate grid(NAD 83-96 Ad}). b..,,J ,ter • 2. The total ares of the property.computed to the Ordinary Higheoter Ills and the seawall is 32.396 aquas feet or 0.743 acres er from ords mode 3s,by rtesident testimmyc or by locations provided vided structures Gopher Stateeon Onewere Coll.I perted Ticketh No.10690518.Otherunitiesand services be to present.Verification end location of all utilities and services Mould be obtained from the owners of the repectire utilities prior to any design. planning or excavation. y en gonerproperty �j>�/�////%///�DENOTES(ROPOSE I TRACT E3)L OCATION �. "••.., 4. No Zoning information was provided by the insur . SEE SPECIAL NOTE .. 5. According to the Federal Emergent Management A Web site the d•ec edea hereon lies within Flood Zones x(oleos of 0.211 ``` "••., annual then.flooding)and Flood Zone AE(arms below an elevation of 931 feet)per Federal Ins...Rale Map No.27053C0304E,datedCERTIFICATION• September 2.2004. '47 • I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that am 6. As of the date of this survey the property described here.contains a total of 32 striped parking Notes. a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 7. As of the dote of this survey there Is no observable eNdmce of earth moving work.buldhg construction or building additions within PROPOSED TRACT 3 DESCRIPTION: Dote of survey March 23,zo11. recent months on the property described hereon.The...Abject bject site Is ounnently undergoing renovation. Dote of su:May 6,2013. S • 8. Ac of the dote of this survey there is no observable evidence that the property tlesabed hereon is being used as a said waste dump, That Port of Hennepin County unt 3.StSeate Ai 1 Highway TownMp 1o. 5.Plat Range 23 oned al the satae6ext u so0 f the 1Nych elico sLoth6,Elbr of Sine sump«eonitary landfill. south line of Same..First Subdivsionn Section 10dTownship 117 Ran a 23,1 and a north easterly extensions of the southerly rine of Lot 6,Elbridge S. _ _ p gar antl the mrth line of t Avmu0.formerlyControl A � � 9. The legal description and easement uformatun used u the preparation of this survey were based on the Commitment for Title hsuran. currently proceedingssubsequent for initial registration on thin parcel with the intent to add sold parcel to the current certificate Brent R Paten,PS prepared by Old Republic National fills Insurance Company Application No.ORiE732959 hating on affectivw dote of February 6.2011. of title.There is Y° su seguenMinnesota License No.44123 10. This Survey Mows only those Improvements Nalble during the field survey,some structures and improvements covered by ice end mow, or underground may not be Mown. FIELD BOOK PAGE FIELDWORK REVISIONS SURVEY FOR: PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2840 16 CHIEF: 1229 Tyler Street NE,Suite 100 P.M D. NO DATE DESCRIPTION BOUNDARY Minneapolis,Minnesota 55413 DRAWN BY: 1 4-11-11 CERT PARTIES NSMSB, LLC 1955 Shoreline Drive .� PHONE:(612)466-3300 B.R.P. 2 7-19-11 COMPLETED DOCK NORTH UNE FAX:(612)466'3383 DRAWING NAME: 3 4-20-13 CERTIFICATION &PROPOSED PARCEL DESCRIPTION SURVEY Orono, Minnesota 55391 34722-BDRY.dwa CHECKED 4 7-31-15 PROPOSED PARCEL&PROCEEDINGS SUB. Egan,field EJ Nowak,Inc. WWW.EFNSURVELD&OM COPYRIGHT© 2011 By EGAN,FIELD•NOWAK,INC JOB NO. 34722 BY: tend surveyors •Ins• 1872 FILE NO. 5913 R R.P. . .... . - . . . - . . • ,-'' ''' .'llik.- T!'''---:! - -....;,-,.,.. ' ' .s'..74W, ' ., . .:.-J . . . ; .. -...,, , .7: - -- . - : I, -•44. ,,, -., - -.8,11t--..- - t ,, .. . , 'igt °•--*.i'''."tr '. 7: '- 1-'''-.0•1i - ....,. ..1 .... . . ... ',: 2 ' ' 14 . .- . ......,-„, . .. ,, :.-.,- - * -.-",•'irr..• . .... . ., - . . . . „. • ,,,, -..,...,,,... °.f.it.'. '---,..•, ' .--,..,, , ' -,, ' ', ?:.#--10:- --;14.A-1, i' ', .,,,,, Ar--...'.-44- tt' - -,-• • ' .- .!..„.'.,.::#. ,_. iv • , . - -r, --,---f-,z • . ..• •.---,''.:., • ,,-r _- , ...- : .,.• • ','4. ".;''i,lf • „ . • / •'',.-; •• 1•-•.:- '4,--,. 1-'1.,-•:,-,-..k, ., . ., ,. .., .*,f.*, . •4:,. •11.1'...L. ,,„ • -•-.: • '.., . .,,.. .' -"0- .'•''7'..' - ' ," ' :1101.411"1. .4„.,..„ --- ' --....,.. .....„ • ..-,, .....„....i.110)....04(.... ,. • t.,....;,,,...,,.....„. ..„.. ;,..•...?1,44 , .1. ,. , ..... '-'7,4. -r-..i.;-:',.... : '...•k.,..'*, " 4..,,,.:.4. '' . ,.., '''7't .'=t,,,..,:i..,:,,,.-,44,));-.17- ..,:;' :)..,..-1_,......„:„. ., r 'NSA, • . • - • . , ..„ ,..., "...,' ..;,,„ f' ,,„1-0-}.. • - 4 .401"""' '.''' . ''''!v, '' 1 : .'7:,,,:.•4'..Y.:'1.1sjo--,::.4,,:; .1 , - -,•• ---:".;"-,) . '-:. ...t..., ..e.- fr '' . . . . , '-- '44111111116. .. 0 , ,,, -.... .,•.,-, ,,,‘ , ,,,, ,:.•. ,....,,,?'- ... .,‘. - - 4. .' .- .. .,. . . .. -.4111110 - —:. , ., •:.-1 a t - .,,-,.., „. ., • . .. ... •_„ .i.: .- . . . .•., . ::-c::: - ,-,;••••..„ , '- - . ..• Att - , „. , •••„,•,.., _, i , 'V., - ' . , . • • ! ;•‹:.i- .'' ' • ' . '4.°':- ,, . 11163. - - ..,_ . t . it 4. . . '''' - l',..:St likk ... '4c14" .., • - . , ,„ s,,,,,. -1144'.'":: ., -., , . „ . • -.. . e - . ..•, . , • - - . e' - ' • a.' • . •• :,,,•,,, ' 4. •, ,. . , - -•,,r, •' ' I.• .IN, .7, / .0$ . . ,, . .. , . . .. .0 . . ...........4..,... . .. ...w . ... in .. - . ''.:47A10,i.,;.'...74141V 4',f.'„''''',''xr'• ' III 'N.*:-1 t '' l' --...*, - /1‘ ... , . . , ,-•, . ii-i‘t - --t--.L,,,:i e: '''' ';-'' '" l't':' ,1/4:' " 1\l'... - ' - . ' --.':-.~4, : , ‘'.= •,,, , ' .,:.4'j'' ' , - i,,k ( ' '.' „talk(-. ...a ' "r".,', -.1,7 ''' 1 '-,.• ','--'Z.'-'r-, '-',....).%;•.°.•1 - .; • ,v, .is• • r'',...-„..41f, Y".•-„' ' •• ,, ,,g, ',:. . 'WH -„ ' , „;11,4,H. -. ; 1 CU ' ..'• II.'•.-)I'"•,,t,l, - . , • -4, 1.4- - •, -- . ° . • (I. . . , •- - •-•,- / k ' 1111 ' „ .. 41 1 j. . , :, ... ONGUO 40 _All's) . s, 11 ir 1 ' . • • 103. Alai. .: .,. ... _ . . C33.A 303H ,_, ,....,.,. 11,07., IL t Ha ., iti i1 rr $RECEIVED . iig §1 t-iiri• Jai tni i,{ it;-0.1; ,•-igtar!- e F ► W 1°ii,,ial' -j;! !sl}', love. 11�a a} F i I yp.11 1 i 7 2011 !Wog (ili,i;I4i ' t`ilio Jf11IiI1 i I i Y { §�'t)liajl.iftl3i �)�ii1 s i ia a l $ i i "tU 1`it �II #iFlii,t ` °a=I,_ if .. i.. fl F ORONC •; !iil i1�1,r1 ' [la 14 1 I I I^ _ toii;1 l}€ i'l,':1l lt, ai k 11 ii,t••(f41 i- !l li co dill it i i-lat;_a lll1pis;, II l 'P ;�°!*3 ]lf ';1ft'if tal� �� 4 j '•i �� � ``,�o:Z +}laj'i ► �! i 1 ! 1 ial j►t;tI }1, 1.14 i ! 4,:;viii I.'1i,i_iF if ' is t ,{a11 I I ` ' il't � =lt 1 �lih�lte II ' �11 f ! is E ,7, j I r l$: a t, e l r a a .-ii 1 i i / .0 :'r 8i T ° { 'IV skb • • • • N 2 1 n t; ! 1 1 ; ; if al ( / II s i. � • 6Qf r !t ' 6 N • /4, i • f 14 a • V b ® `' . I J • A i� 'rd is m .... 1,4,... „f,••,- ....- 46 • .,41111§ip . , Ail, 1 ill , ill I N\ *4 1.-:::. N qk..kt ' • ") - / 'WI 'ai _,,,'"\ / I if; I o 4/ . N \k-; it ' /,) as g NN/ i € \ 40 aI fel te , N1\`/ y € fj EE ., F, 1 e`r'g/ /�'' ��. CI Ej �y \•\ 11 i., Z OC ..1.) / t / \ . ,. ....„NS i ir i 0 CO t_, \ `\ -)4,:,,,s, �� Ar• ;Ili[ --1 1 l I!• t a' r 0. • i1{ i i f ,,,*A,z_...1,4 ; ii 1 11 i III }t; I iE ISE iHi j }li ;} t \ „.N. i if {� ; E i 1 W ' t,P 11 ., !4 I 1 i. ;iota i t i •?�.:„. \ +� '\ os ,g tf t ; °` i Iif., � 1 1! ;in I tjli,l ::�'o \ r I ii t 1 E: ai'lY j! 1, it-' l� }i; rii ii } _ 7.1 •-�, \\l / ` ° t llii , fll Ili ;if! la 1 r- ?, '! fil 61' Ili {pi! ii ii d. gam/ \ ;1 i 1 11 ! III 4-' - "ii lig i {i# Il ibill,li 1,1! F .810• , !la ! p , 1p l jc is ,. i ; tii��}t{€ Ft d. / ilia; 1 i i€Ii fi !! iftp �; !'#�1''ifilii. t€ ii/�j` �� c aiia t i i ;i t� 'B`s as; f .It ; ''{i`i ! jit!�/1 �i1! /'`:?T ^ iii :1 it H i tif '• iItiltiaiili!initfN{ ! �' e ' / i ;3 ! it ill 1_ al ! `'---�_,_..,„,._./ \ ,: t� ��:iii01. 1j .\/y , :(:\\N4* 3 ...,—. K. rye,Q.' I� `yam y70�' I : ,.\ 3 .. • 'e LIJ \IXr ��. () , aQ, I , cl-, \ r.› CC 4 G. s.,:\p a l••.‘ � 4 <c / pJ I!n ; „ _ c L c� 4• sizi I , � o�� tc` ticy ; I Q` Nt ` y ` a I i` — _� V. •.'111111111111111 --- 44/ ‘1••::liMilkimilr, ftft%eavoftaftvlir '4,\O 41 1.. 1‘‘ / 400 allon. ti J r .4171, X .... 1 3 �:�=ice 1 411111 4 OHW OHW eN • t• `. \. X066!~."`14.41".4.,� . OV �� Vic . $ �f x �c, N • , ' , e crI •\ 4 tft- \ lib 14 L`\ Lam-�/ '4, /`'� 'c7 1i . --....\ C>:,-) 1 i4 L 00 ,0 It in 1 % o: x { 0 s e h iqk I •••4 1 / I4j .t, � v RECEIVED EIVED t O ,so APR - 2017IN / < 3 9 3 / �A 47 - \ORON O PC Exhibit D 14 Plans Ji 1 3 4 g. k t E zit r- -- r: fz It Z 1 a . 4 1 S - 4 1 i ijil C Os 0 I L V fl st i 1.1 4 1014 b t _,.: Z % i i‘t -,. . — 1------- is .4:0. ,_ g , `� a1 ,,„ ,.. ... , t ,,,,,, RECEIVED APR 1 7 2017 CIN OF ORONO # 3934 i C`` ,-JiC 1 I ' i 1 :{1 h 1 H QQ Kr ''' i 1 iIt- 4- t &\--- id 49 k / st) i ii it 1 RECEIVED APR 1 7 2017 2 CITY OF ORONO # 393A Ft . • k ila \ '---\-\b 5-1 - ' ,j oi .21%\ '- .- 'fr- 4 !, y -� i in X \% :- . , ti '.- -,-1/ ..,. : I ( ' 1 rj- \i ,•••14h V S9;:t ;:i4g to4 1 \ a S i .,____\._ , jsr \....,„,..,....„ ..„,,, 1 n i'l $ 1� tti L 1 4IIj gl RECEIVED +n 4� z � t APR 1 7 2017 t % # 3934 CITY OF ORONO • N1.,.;..... r .. .. ,........- ,,_,L,„--',"-- `;.• --• ; r <1. C., r. [- 7 ' IT ...V'r ,o)), .,' it4 s .....---;1 ------,,,' c,...,,.. ' _4. -4-.: , , J .s.v.z..... lid c...y ''.. LP (3 144 I eh S5r 1 il N TIL . Cm/Iiiir 1 -\\:1/"11 ;\ kn ..... 1'r 1 1 aa lb,-----IN Arz) zils- f ft, 2ki_.H %Si **lc ., s`c,It aikeIN ---} 4 0 I,- 4. . 7 k 9 3 4 RECEIVED t.r # 3 1 .7 7017 ... 417...... .....* ifl F OR°N° c iv _o NORTH S MARINA V.1 APP • o • w . LAKE MINNETONKA, USA O n Et! Lxrnp-A-1 o Z m m 0 IR ECEIVED AP i 17 207 / 7..- .. a r cp,.3No .. .,. .,.. ., ,.. . , .. . . ,.. v. ,,,...•4 t. . - 4 4., 1' •...,,,,1„,:,&14.4.741.k.4'4*;!.',4,„.',40104:.- .4.4..:'''....kt ;144-14.:44'`Olee ft:• ‘.., Is• , - Z, 4;,;:,5. ,. 11 ' '''''' " 1: .4.'7. . • , .I • 1'0"( .4. ' 3, ' .:, . .. • ; „,., .!..7 - . .. - . T. ', I - ., ' 'PSI 4 t • t .i' '14 OIND•, '•::,..•:-'' ;1-.:'''-'' '..-- ' ' MI C' .-- a.C 0 M 195.0 cline • . --- _,._ .............. . . ............ ._ ........................___________... ....... -................ f ...... .. ,.. • . . . 0 ,.. .•-...,:., „ „. ., PC . .4 lko • ' • - - Exhibit E #17-3934 , 0 ,-- z r-f.:;. ,,..,,,4 :1•1,, ..",,' ,,, ..1- • : 1,4 > c•-•' 5,.., ..-- - i - -ii-: :-,A :. : c fr ' ir? cf-RsIgr IA ' ,,,. --, '...,:-:",,. tt, --t•:- „i '- " ' '' % 0 = , ,, -4-- ,. ,,--',,,- - 1,-4' '', tr 44 • —;•'„s„„Aii %! 1, ''' + • la a- dr' ' -# --';;;44,.. 4 ..„, , •.-4::::-... ---- ..,..,.., 4,, -...‘,.•,;.-046, -„...; ,,k -3.21.--, r ii 4* ';( '•21 4 ,„, ...4...;=4,..-,1 `,- '. Ile:: ---'9,,-..-, '0.44r0.40-,1,- . 11" 6., . .,,14.14.4.- -, •,,,r .,r,t. , ,, ', V i :...274.,-,.. -1:., ,- 4 7 '1 : i _ . ... ",...' .r'''• * all , n's-c, , •-•./ : \V- ' ,1- ,,?. • ' ' ,- ,,--/',..- „ ,,,,,,. ,,,,....;,,,, ',,....;',.. *-1.77:', ''','' 1, •;-. ' • 4. ,kk' -A'; kr 3 -••••.,.__ r,,, i , 00-. .,,/. ..,...0/ f.. .‘, ...it !... ', •:.- 4 ,4:-' , .:',1",40-. ••;W 44 'z' c ` 7.- ,-..1., . 7r• 72, .. ':* • ''''' '''' ''': -..-77- ':4'.: „..,..... I ''' A '*- ..•''-'4 . •.”- ,„„_ .4r,4!",..:,,,Ssfr'tf. !--e."'",:'-., --14 li ' -1iW..395-" 1" ._ f: -.„-; '-, ' It,,...... ...-. ..--• - ..., 4-f. *,_ ' k 7'•'... 44:, :''''•': -• ....'.'-'- „'" ' " ' ' ''. 41' 7 •''1. ,-,4 ,.. ' ' .,;- wk . ,..,, . - ... „.... ,, Q .. -.....t.".. ;k.,*;:'k 11P,--....... ... •-••`•-,,,_'`I.k.." ;7'47i7f' "4 7. t.'‘• 3 i 4 .1. ..' 4-.' 7 , „ * :::;.",,.• , : - -1 ' .,-k ;:' ;#:' : s.,**', 7 ;421 ,,1.r * ' 4*,:„„ 2a il'.• 4' ,----.:- ! ..., r , „,,,,,s, ,, - •17,- ,%ter-.41F"' ,:V';::::&.,..411'' ---, .•••• , , ,,,- ,,4.— '0 , ,,:1--,,, -, --41- ....,,,,, - --- ': s-l• • 7,-;:ilifite---.. ---:'., ' :• •-tt-...-44 ''. r '''''.., :,. -`-----;-1.T--A,:e',„ , F), •'-4- -V'-'-''''.-* , _ 11 . . ., , , I le;t*,`.. • — •-e.. .° .,./.'1'.k. — loft,t4t—,1 .', . ),--_.. .:4"....r.. • -,, .._ 4 1 7 •'1•• _ _ 7 .;:.' „-7 - ....--), .,,; - - - •4 7 10.''' .. . :• , •-.N4. r V -; 1 N ... . . . ..---o 1 f • 4 • ' --of% y,ra. ,... -, ' '" . ,-. t 44)iv.._iii -..--,r:, , i;:-,44.0.4' , , ' ' - - - - ,. It' e•-.4- ..$,- ,-.., ,,,----:.-; '''' , e ..1 v• t .,‘,4' ' '-7; * It,...- * kl.f" ..$44.4i.••..4 4h'• ,. ' '. - ''•.,4--'0,:,.1 , 1": , I -Atikt46° ' ,.. . 'Pr . a co, f i. lo, t - • •- . - ..•. •''' ,;.. ......, ' ' v , . _ . ,. ., . .. ., RECEIVED7 :",::.,':,,..,,,:. 4:11C PR 1 201 a ., CI., , , i TYOF ORONO . ...4. , ...., . .. , �- ...� • � sem:.1..k."--,,r � - • 6 .. , yrgy 1 mss �tR — 'j i 1 • 0.• q 11 1114 1 # p ` a • #it CO p tr•-.. 1: ,'''., ... '1.,-,‘• r b # 3934 11 y�, ' f, i• 3 , '' _ . t11?i r. $4.%,... IZ...,„,..,,, iiii. 0'i,,,,,. i< N. RECEIVED APR 1 7 2c11 I # 3934 crry OF OPONO PC EXHIBIT F 17-3934 • 711411)Por - - /- 4: Sign to be removed , , ' PO' *:: t4/';'''' • - `;a ., fix -., //i/ .4 - ,:.'''. .:-0 .4-!-4-s--'7,-, "' '"' - r '' -'''':n . • ,..,.v. . ,..,„„„.. ,,, ...,,, , -„..,ii ,, , ..,,,, ,,,,,,,-. . .2.,, 1 ... . ,...., .,. .. -_, „,,,,,. .. / ,,,.. _,,,, ......... . . . . ....-...._. .0,,,.,. _. . ..100-... „...„." ..,.....,„ // . , „... .. . ,„4„. .•.. i.,y,y,'�aipb, r f y 2 ( 7 n V \r, • • • • y/ A New Sign to r}• Location - �� = T k. ..., / .... 4 / • • 0.., 401 / / • y • =x y'., ,1�" Sign to be �. * �, ;-" ' ,� �;; f � _ removed � Via:y.. \�'' 000:5 %, , a{ • ...„7:c.- ,(00101rW _ . „,":7, ,..,,,iiciat.--..- -•-..iir' ,i` i -.. -N , . . *Al',, '.. -..--,,--4'*; . =Vir' ".. .,,., 4141.14— ' ' .: ,.,. .., ' /IP N* .t w 8• p� 1 �t + w�''�. ° 4-4.—-4 R:—�1 Jt 'I R�7 • eh R7• i ‘ •• / 1c w A i I a • tt ,. d: New Sign Location PC Exhibit G #17-3934 From: Michael D Olmstead To: "Jim Kirkland" Cc: Melanie Curtis;""DAVID KIRKLAND"" Subject: RE: 1955 Shoreline Dr.Orono entry sign Date: Thursday,April 13,2017 12:40:13 PM Jim, Hennepin County does not have an issue with the placement of your new monument. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Mike Olmstead Permits Supervisor Hennepin County Transportation - Operations 612-221-7162 (cell) 612-596-0336 (office) https://roadpermits.co.hennepin.mn.us From:Jim Kirkland [mailto:jim.NSMSB@mediacombb.net] Sent:Thursday, April 13, 2017 10:55 AM To: Michael D Olmstead <Michael.Olmstead@hennepin.us> Cc: Melanie Curtis<MCurtis@ci.orono.mn.us>; "DAVID KIRKLAND" <KIRKLANDDM@GMAIL.COM> Subject: 1955 Shoreline Dr. Orono entry sign Hello Mike— I'm working with Melanie Curtis at the City of Orono on a new entry sign for our marina property at 1955 Shoreline Drive in Orono. The proposed new sign location requires a variance from the City's code and we are submitting an application to the City for that. In connection with that, Melanie suggested that I send to you the variance package,for your information, and I've attached it here. I've also attached a digital copy of our site survey. If you have any questions or concerns about the proposed sign and its location, we would appreciate your input. Our application goes before the Orono City Planning Commission on May 15, and the full City Council on June 15. Thank you in advance for your help. Jim Kirkland North Shore Marina Smiths Bay jim(ansmarina.com 651-208-9472 Disclaimer: If you are not the intended recipient of this message,please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly delete this message from your computer system. PC RUN DATE:04/05/2017 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) Exhibit H 38 10-117-23 310001 38 10-117-23 42 0021 #17-3934 THOMAS REDMOND D CREAR&M B CREAR 2010 SHORELINE DR 1980 SPATES AVE ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 THOMAS REDMOND DANIEL CREAR 2010 SHORELINE DR 1980 SPATES.AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117.23 31 0002 38 11)-117-23 42 0022 K&L ERICKSON DANIEL&MARY CREAR 2040 NORTH SHORE DR 1960 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 KEITH R ERICKSON DANIEL&MARY CREAR 2040 NORTH SHORE DR 1980 SPATES AVENUE WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0090 38 10.117-23 42 0023 SUSAN DAMMEN TIMOTHY E BLANKENSHIP 2040 SPATES AVE 1990 SPATES AVE ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 SUSAN DAMMEN TIMOTHY BLANKENSHIP 5100 CHOWEN AVE S 1990 SPATES AVE MINNEAPOLIS MN 55410 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0096 38 10-117-23 42 0024 M N HANSON&J L HANSON NSMSB LLC 2060 SPATES AVE 1955 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 MATTHEW N HANSON NSMSB LLC 2060 SPATES AVE ATFN RICHARD A ANDERSON WAYZATA MN 55391 1955 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0010 CITY OF ORONO 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO MN 00000 CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-23 42 0005 J DUTCHER&M K DUTCHER 1930 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 JOSEPH DUTCHER 1930 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 42 0007 A R NETFLES&A T NETTLES 1940 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 ALAN NETTLES&ANNE NETTLES 1940 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117.23 42 0012 MARIA LUISA CASTELLON 1950 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 MARIE L CORNEJ 1950 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 42 0016 L MARTINI&C MARTINI 1920 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 LELAND MARTINI CHRISTINE MARTINI 1920 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 F 38 10-117-23420017 tl RaECEWED M FEHRESTI&H MOUSAVINASAB 1910 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 APR 1 7 ?017 MAJID FEHRESTI 86121ERRELA N 3934 MAPLE GROVE MN VE MN 55311 CITY OF ORONO Hennepin County has developed electronic forms of certain property information databases.Hennepin County makes reasonable efforts to produce and publish the most current property information available.The viewer should understand,however,that Hennepin County makes no representation or warranties,either express or implied,or as to merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose regarding the accuracy and/or completeness of the information contained herein RECEIVED APR 1 / 2017 CITY OF ORONO # 3934 r PC Exhibit I Hennepin Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map #17-3934 Provided By: Resident and Real Estate Services Date: 4/5/2017 f, lie) 'a: (+7) ^'',. (51 11 17-23-31 0-1 -4. m 410000, 06) gyp,, iv * _ s„d,N0 '..311/V ml 1-117-213-31 10-1 - GQ,.; yts y .?. iv) 10-117-23-34 "z' -- -23-43 10-117-23-34 10-117-23-43 Buffer Size: 350 feet 0 60 120 240 ft Map Comments: 111111111 NSMSB LLC RECE vEn 1955 Shoreline Drive For more information contact. Orono, MN 55391 p u .. Hennepin County GIS Office APR I . .i 300 6th Street South Minneapolis, MN 55487 @ h gis.infennepin.us CITY OF ORONO 3 934 Item 04 Date Application Received: April 18,2017 A Date Application Considered as Complete:April 18,2017 9.- 60-Day Review Period Expires: June 18,2017 � a y � To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members Dour Reeder, Interim City Administrator 44-FS1-10‘' From: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Development Director Date: May 15, 2017 Subject: #17-3935,Orono Public Schools, 2687 Wayzata Blvd, Conditional Use Permit Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to convert the existing building to Transportation Operations, and storage, under the "Trucking operations, but not distribution centers conditional use in the I-1 industrial zoning district. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit,subject to the following conditions: 1. No bus washing improvements are permitted without a CUP amendment as bus washing improvements will impact SAC rates and possible other fees. 2. All repair must occur interior to the building. No major repair (engineer overhauls, body work,etc.) 3. The fuel island shall be located in the side or rear yard; the Fire Chief must approve final location. 4. A berm and landscape screen shall be added to the north of the employee parking area, plan to be approved by staff. The berm shall undulate in height, between 2 and 6 feet in height and include grasses, shrubbery, and evergreen trees intended to provide screening of parked school buses. 5. Fire and Building Codes shall be preserved. Background The school district plans to purchase the building at 2687 Wayzata Blvd and convert it into bus operations center and storage. The bus operations will include a small office, restroom, and small maintenance area for minor bus repair,as well as indoor bus parking for 18 buses. Also indoors will include 5,000 sq ft of storage for the school district, primarily supplies and equipment. Outdoor bus storage would include 15 buses and vans to be located along the east property line. Additional exterior improvements include above ground fuel tanks (propane and diesel)to the front of the building. Landscaping and pine trees are also proposed along the front of the building. A formal landscaping plan has not yet been developed. No additions to the building are proposed. The Orono bus garage is currently located in Long Lake,at 505 Tamarack Avenue in Long Lake. Pp FILE#17-3935 May 15,2017 Page 2 of 5 LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-825-Setbacks: INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT Required Proposed Front 35 190.7 Rear 20 38 Side 10 90 Side 10 15.6 Section 78-825-Lot Area/Width: I DISTRICT _ Lot Area Lot Width Required 40,000 s.f. (.918 acres) 200' Actual 89,216 s.f. (2.05 acres) 228' The lot is a conforming lot, and the structure meets all applicable setbacks. Applicable Regulations: Sec.78-823.-Conditional uses. (a) General provisions. Within the I-Industrial District, no structure or land shall be used for one or more of the following uses without approval of a conditional use permit. The following are conditional uses in the I-Industrial District: (1) Open and outdoor storage as an accessory use, provide that: a.The open storage area is screened and landscaped from adjacent residential uses and public right-of-way. b. The open outdoor storage area is surfaced with concrete or bituminous. c. The open outdoor storage area shall not be within any front yard or side yard abutting a public right-of-way. The open outdoor storage shall be setback five feet from all side and rear lot lines and shall not be located within a utility or drainage easement. d.The open outdoor storage area shall not utilize any required off-street parking, loading areas, or access space. e.The open outdoor storage area shall not be used for storage of hazardous liquids, solids, gases, or wastes. f. The property owner shall keep all outdoor storage areas free of refuse,trash, debris,weeds, and waste fill. (2) Commercial and public radio and television transmitting antennas, and public utility microwave antennas. (3) Commercial, private, and public satellite dish transmitting or receiving antennas in excess of two meters in diameter. (4)Accessory, enclosed service activity other than allowed by a permitted use within the I-Industrial District. (5) Day care centers. (6)Trucking operations, but not distribution centers. FILE#17-3935 May 15,2017 Page 3 of 5 (7)Trade schools. (8) Warehouse conversion to mini-storage. (9) Wholesale showrooms. (10) Deferment of parking. (b) Required conditions and policies of a conditional use permit. The burden of proof demonstrating compliance with the following criteria shall be the responsibility of the applicant. In determining whether to approve or deny a conditional use permit,the city council and planning commission shall find that the conditional use permit complies with the following criteria: (1) Comprehensive plan. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official comprehensive plan of the city. (2) Compatibility. The proposed use is compatible with adjacent present and future anticipated land uses. (3) Performance standards. The proposed use conforms with all applicable performance standards contained in this division. (4) No depreciation in value. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. (5) Nuisance. Nuisance characteristics generated by the use will not have an adverse effect upon existing and future development in adjacent areas. (6) Economic return. The use will provide an economic return to the community and be commensurate with other industrial uses for which the property could feasibly be used. In considering the economic return to the city,the planning commission and city council may give weight to the sociological impact of proposed use, both positive and negative. The applicant has provided a narrative, describing the use. The applicant should be asked for additional testimony regarding the required conditions and policies of a conditional use permit, iteml-6 above. Applicable Regulation:Conditional Use Permit(Section 78-916) The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council may grant a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) as the use permit was applied for or in modified form. On the basis of the application and the evidence submitted,the city must find that the proposed use at the proposed location is or will be: 1) Consistent with the community management plan; The community management plan suggests industrial uses in this part of Orono. 2) Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as required by article V,division 3 of the City Code; "Trucking,but not distribution centers"is a listed conditional use in the Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission should determine if the conditions are satisfied. If the Planning Commission and Council feel the listed use is not similar to bus garage,they should deny the application. 3) Adequately served by police,fire, roads,and stormwater management; The site is on a county road with capacity for the designed traffic. During peak hours, based on FILE#17-3935 May 15,2017 Page 4 of 5 empirical experience,full maneuverability may be problematic,delaying left turns onto Wayzata Blvd. 4) Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system; The site is served by municipal water and sanitary sewer. Bus washing is mentioned in the write up, but not shown on the plan. If bus washing is to occur in a dedicated space,i.e.a washbay it should be shown on a site plan,and may impact effluent draining and applicable SAC units for the property. 5) Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; The use is not expected to require additional policing,traffic control,or staffing from the city. 6) Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is planned to be used in the future; The neighborhood has been developed;the proposed use is not expected to impact adjacent uses.The surrounding properties are well maintained, present a polished appearance,and storage areas are screened from view. The Commission should determine if the proposed use of the exterior spaces is consistent with the surrounding area. 7) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; The Planning Commission should determine if a fuel island and exterior bus storage is consistent with the character of the neighborhood. Staff suggests that a berm/screen plan be developed to shield the buses from the road,and the fuel island be located to the rear or side of the building. 8) Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; The Commission should determine if the proposed use of the exterior spaces is consistent with the surrounding area. 9) Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area or have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses; No evidence has been presented. 10) Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and activities likely to disturb surrounding uses; A Screening plan has not yet been developed.This plan should include grasses,shrubbery,and trees,and an undulating berm between 2-5 feet,and be approved by staff. 11) Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise,glare,vibration, odors,fumes, dust,electrical interference,general unsightliness, or other means; The bus storage and garage is not expected to create nuisances as listed. Minor repair is to occur indoors. 12) Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties,traffic congestion, or unsafe access; The site is sized to accommodate anticipated parking requirements. 13) Designed to take into account the natural,scenic, and historic features of the area and to minimize environmental impact; Not applicable. 14) All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; No additional lighting is proposed and 15) Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. Staff believes this criteria to be met. FILE#17-3935 May 15,2017 Page 5 of 5 A CUP may be granted subject to such conditions as the Council may prescribe. Additionally, a CUP shall remain in effect as long as the conditions imposed by the City Council are observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the city from enacting or amending official controls to change the status of conditional uses. Conditional Use Permit Analysis Bus garages are not a listed permitted or conditional use, but seem similar to "Trucking, but not distribution". The implication here is to avoid large warehouses that require frequent deliveries to and from. If the Commission and Council disagree with staff's interpretation,they should deny the Conditional Use Permit application. The bus garage traffic will be highest in the morning (6:30 through 9:15) and early afternoon (2- 4:30) as part of the school pick up and return process. No students will come to the bus garage. These hours also align with the AM rush,the result may limit the ability to make a left turn out of the driveway, though no traffic study has been requested. Wayzata Blvd plans show a median break,there does not appear to be room to accommodate turning lanes. The biggest issue seems to be parking of the buses outdoors(screening)and the fuel island. Staff does not view vehicle parking as outdoor storage, but does have a concern with yellow buses visible from the street and the residential/commercial properties to the north. It is suggested a berm and landscaping be installed, this is preferable to a fence as fences tend to degrade over time. The Planning Commission should discuss location options and possible berming and screening with the applicant. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property in an appropriate manner reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the CUP, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose additional conditions in order to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested use. 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Narrative Exhibit C. Proposed Site Plan Exhibit D. Area Map Exhibit E. Property Owners List and Map PC Exhibit A 17-3935 City of Orono Conditional Use Permit Application Street Address: Application# 1 7 j ��O/� TO 2750 Kelley Parkway 1�/ Orono,MN 55356 Date Received: y/, 7 Main: 952-249-4600 Staff: �J( fax: 952-249-4616 Fee: $700 Mailing Address: Escrow: $700 / 14A P.O.Box 66 (4� G� Crystal Bay,MN 55323-0066 Notes: '& SHO�� Please complete. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning/ Commission Agendas. SITE LOCATION: 2 i ? 1 ' 2 i un +r, M 01/4) Q,'J.iV AA,U J5 3 s�O DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: (attached additional sheets at necessary) APPLICANT INFORMATION: 14,ch h re if Applicant address should be used for billing Applicant: �/� cur ci !"cabi1.0 S•-1- X)L Phone(Primary): R.5 Z.- t-P Y- '345-- Mailing ysMailing Address: (oS N U, C/7s /4ity: J/ov1 t ZIP: S-5-3. Email: 1-6/1C-C-0/ , 0/0110 e K-1 z t r1 t PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: 0 check here if Property Owner is same as applicant 0 check here if Property Owner address should be used for billing Name: Phone (Primary): Mailing Address: City: ZIP: Email: APPLICANT AND/OR PROPERTY OWNER: • Certify that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant and property owner recognize that they are solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of its potential merit. • The Property Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff,consultants,agents,Commission and Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. • Property Owner and/or Applicant acknowledge they must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or property owner is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant/owner and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. • Information will be distributed via email. � Applicant Signature: ice/ � Date: LI 11 Npplicant Signature: Date: 'erty Owner Signature: Date: RECEIVED Owner Signature: Date: APR 1 R 7017 —January 2017 * 39 - CITY OF ORONO Page 4 wsL°Ato City of Orono F TO G Pre-Application Meeting Form 114 SHOe- (This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting.) +. .R rf` ' i .1::'.1:3-: : 3 a -7,` ,,' „,k7,1-r a .�{,4, -•fi:.- ,�... g,r ' � .,kt�f r '-es,, �,*� {. �� `,:�'� ��'� � tv4. �j.'i.:���{��,- -t�y a.F d' , r�e'wi. I'”f' �xT,^":y'''a,,X p �`K .4z s s.r ...+ F it. F`,,..4, `t aa�'s t •'3' .' rr"8G v..,,,, ,.4`�` - i a✓ lg, �.- r b s % ';-�' w 1•• n� ! 1 - 'Y.:, i , erOky _ ,+i¢e,�gI 1 lacit,.. w .i l krt yi:.?'7.0_L;+ti ,.r:, .k z&- ', ".,.:;-s rr.'eii ' t.*e.. . ,,e,:,,,,,4,-01.4,45..."y t,' •, ",.kw.,i. .s. r,ws.l'.s'i : _si.ietn 'Si'. `. 'x-_,. What is the purpose of a pre-application meeting? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal,inform them of the procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: 2cos31 vLIu,4 A(,,(1 \Ai$ ()rv.-,v .v% 55 5 c Property Identification Number(PIN). 33 j( R-2...3 i,3 COOL Zoning District: /-yeti 6 „A Size of Property: 2 05 A...rc� LAND USE REQUESTS: ❑Appeal of 0 Commercial Site 0 Comprehensive Plan ❑Easement/ROW Administrative Decision Plan Review Amendment Vacation, without subdivision _ ❑ PID 0 PUD-Residential 0 RPUD,without 0 Ordinance Amendments 0 PUD-Commercial _ subdivision including Rezoning ❑ Other: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTS: ❑Amend Existing CUP Commercial/Industrial Use 0 Duplex Credit (per bldg) ❑ Grading and filling- 0 Grading and filing- 0 Grading and filing-with 75 feet of OHWL 501 cy or more Wetland and flood plain _ (includes seawalls and retaining walls) ❑Guest House/ 0 Institutional I ❑ Residential/ _ Guest Apartment Type: 0 Renewal of CUP I Residential Accessory Use f Type: Applicant's BILLS AND ESCROW: The land use application fee is for citystaff time and overhead Initials: PP costs only. Owner and/or Applicant shall pay for consultant expenses incurred in review of Property this application and/or additional staff time np,t covered in initial application fee, as well as Owner's provide an escrow in the amount of$ t , ' to guarantee payment of the above. Initials: OTHER INFORMATION: *Please note: Your land use or conditional use permit application will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this form will be completed by City staff. / , . Applicant Signature: -- -/rDate: 1-1118/11?- � Property Owner Signature: Date: RECEIVED APR 1 8 70 CUP Application-January 2017 Page 3 # 3 9 35 CITY OF ORONO A PC Exhibit B 17-3935 ORONO os`k`s`"0 04 Project Narrative Orono Schools is seeking to purchase the property located at 2687 Wayzata Blvd, Orono MN 55356 for use as a future Transportation Operations and School District Storage. This lot is currently zoned Industrial. As outlined in your City Code, Trucking Operations are Permitted Conditional Uses. The School District is seeking approval for a Transportation Operations to be seen as a Permitted Conditional Use in your Industrial Zone. The building contains roughly 17,000 sq ft with a 2,000 sq ft mezzanine that is built out into an office format for a total sq footage of 19,000 sq ft. The school district plans to occupy approximately 5,000 sq ft of the building as District Storage and the remainder of the space would be designated as Transportation Operations. Bus Garage Orono Schools plans to maintain current tenants of the building until the School District lease expires at our current location in Long Lake. Orono's current Transportation Operations lease expires June 30, 2020. Once this building is converted to a Bus Garage, we plan to house 16, 77 passenger busses and 2, 26 passenger busses inside. Outside storage of busses would be up to 8, 77 passenger busses, 5, 26 passenger busses and 2, 15 passenger vans. The following drawing outlines a potential layout if the entire building was converted to Transportation Operations. At this time, the District plans to maintain the Southwest corner of the building for School District Storage. Orono Dubbc Sr:hool$ 1 i (18)77 PAS.BUSSES (7)26 PAS.BUSSES (2)15 PAS.VANS —EVE— RECEIVED APR 1 8 ?n 3935 CITY OF ORONO Transportation Operations usage would encompas 500 Sq ft of office, bathroom space, small maintenance area for minor bus repair and the remiander would be bus storage. School District StoraEe As mentioned,the school district would maintain approximatley 5,000 sq feet as storage space which would include the storage of school furniture and school supplies. Site The School District plans to add additional landscaping screening to the front of the parking lot to screen visible outside bus storage. The school district will install an above ground Diesel Fuel tank and Propane Fill station as well which would be screened from Wayzata Blvd per code. Future site plans include obtaining an easement from the neighboring property owner to the south to allow for easier bus movements on the south side of the subject property. RECEIVED APR 1 8 ?O1 3935 CITY OF ORONO Y Ln __ . •t m 1/; _ • . IF. sr ,......s7.0 - y d f I 'R� __ •..,t�- `,ftp. st I CI / 1 ...';‘ „ . ' ..... ..... .... .. ... . •...0.,,.,,,. . .v.,, .. .. _ ..... IVV Y t Q O ❑ (t3 .-' T S U v1 _--- N ZS C C i , ' • C r m 0- Q kip AI• k «� i r •'',i-') iiC ii yy ! •fII r� r1 raI LL CL iZ __ n ___ : :„ . ,.,. �.. - @ 1 irt� . . -....l.'.. ..,-,: . • w., : i• _____ .._. . . ,_ _ . , _, •_ .: ._ . ,t.7-..70. .. ti ... c_... I .• . _, ,, _ (---,---_ - - _ ' ! . I ; .... . 4 t I' _ \ \ \ \ • PC Exhibit D 17-3935 Hennepin Hennepin County Property Map Date: 5/11/2017 w• 1. }t d �V e. > - IIi �IIIIiifII I. i i i a t --- _� I s 11 id tPI 1 ' 111 I•i' ag , f.,. tll� ..car .,..,.c... f;'♦i -` •tet 7C 1 i ( 1 ' 44-74 - 'Ilse t f i Y PI - y.l• a 9 •• tr,r . 'f bt s •. � *.* 1 . go=44 1 inch = 100 feet PARCEL ID: 3311823130002 Comments: OWNER NAME: Long Lake Properties LIc PARCEL ADDRESS: 2687 Wayzata Blvd W, Orono MN 55356 PARCEL AREA: 2.05 acres, 89,216 sq ft A-T-B:Abstract SALE PRICE: $1,285,000 SALE DATA: 10/2006 SALE CODE:Warranty Deed This data(i)is furnished'AS IS'with no representation as to completeness or ASSESSED 2016, PAYABLE 2017 accuracy;(ii)is furnished with no itab le PROPERTY TYPE: Industrial-Preferred warrantyefgin eringonsud ri)isnotpurpose for legal,engineering or surveying purposes. HOMESTEAD: Non-Homestead Hennepin County shall not be liable fo r a n y MARKET VALUE: $1,010,000 damage,injury or loss resulting from this data. TAX TOTAL: $33,235.46 COPYRIGHT©HENNEPIN ASSESSED 2017, PAYABLE 2018 COUNTY 2017 PROPERTY TYPE: Industrial-preferred HOMESTEAD: Non-homestead MARKET VALUE: $1,027,000 Hennepin Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map PC Exhibit E 17-3935 Provided By: Resident and Real Estate Services Date: 4/17/2017 o . q: • 'tea -, b' ,-.*1T- . - V ° > v C • + ,.: t � k ..1 .,...44..;t;;,,,*----.- ,.. '`fit`.-F" F3 _2 - - ,� �� # ' tw m 33-118-23-21 =I 33-118-23-12 _ w a r Kelley Parkway .• „,,,7,...._„;,..i.,..• ..n x C e S�. i 41-1 d+ A y alt t �`$• `G .,„--:,..,,,.„,„1,,,., e� ,,,' ; -�r c Atsfi t-,;-...,7., ''e �'„r Q.: 3 0, *�.`:fir F r»� r� ”,45r*- 33-118-23-24 i---� .33-11F-23- 13 33-4�8-23-14 ,, ; r � --7„. '4.'--:',1,74`4, ...,'-',-t ,,,, 33-118-23-24 --1 33-1'8-23-14 A`1 V" 33-118-23-31 33-118-23-42 33-118-23-41 33 118-23-31 33-118-23-4 33-118-23-41 a bo ym Buffer Size: 350 feet 0 120 240 480 ft Map Comments: I ' ' ' l ' i ' I 3311823130002 LONG LAKE PROPERTIES LLC For more information contact. 2687 Wayzata Boulevard West RECEIVED Hennepin County GIS Office Orono, MN 300 6th Street South 55356 Minneapolis. MN 55487 APR 71117 9is• o r9n3 5 CIN OF ORONO Hennepin Hennepin County Locate & Notify Receipt Provided By: Resident and Real Estate Services Print Date Mon Apr 17 14:57:27 2017 This is a receipt only with 'paid'stamp or cash register receipt attached TOTAL COST: $25.00 Company or Homeowner Name: Justin McCoy Contact Person: 952 449 8345 Subject Property Address: 2687 Wayzata Blvd W, Orono Comments: 350'3311823130002 Buffer Distance: 350 feet Mail Label Count: 7 38 33-118-23 12 0002 38 33-118-23 12 0008 38 33-118-23 12 0009 38 33-118-23 13 0002 38 33-118-23 13 0015 38 33-118-23 13 0019 38 33-118-23 13 0021 RECEIVED APR 1 b201 3935 CITY OF ORONO • RUN DATE:04/17/2017 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) PAGE:1 38 33-118-23 12 0002 PROFESSIONAL PROP ORONO LLP 2765 KELLEY PKWY ORONO MN 55356 PROFESSIONAL PROP ORONO LLP 835 PARTENWOOD RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 12 0008 BERKSHIRE PARTNERS LLP 2745 KELLEY PKWY ORONO MN 55356 BERKSHIRE PARTNERS LLP R35 P.ASTENWOOD RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 12 0009 APEX HOLDINGS LLC 2635 KELLEY PKWY ORONO MN 55356 APEX HOLDINGS 1.1.0 16135 55TH AVE N PLYMOUTH MN 55446 38 33-118-23 13 0002 LONG LAKE PROPERTIES LLC 2687 WAYZATA BLVD W ORONO MN 55356 LONG LAKE PROPERTIES LLC 8525 F.PINNACLE PEAK RD 0 100 SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255 38 33.118-23 13 0015 WJM PROPERTIES LLC 2605 WAYZATA BLVD W ORONO MN 55356 WJM PROPERTIES LLC ATTN GREGORY W WAGENER 12550 WAYZATA BLVD MINNETONKA MN 55305 38 33-118-23 13 0019 METRO STORAGE ORONO LLC 2725 WAYZATA BLVD W ORONO MN 55356 METRO STORAGE HHF VENTURE METRO STORAGE LLC 13528 BOULTON BLVD LAKE FOREST IL 60045 38 33-118-23130021 PINE CORNER PROPERTIES LLC 550 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N ORONO MN 55356 PINE CORNER PROPERTIES LLC 550 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE MN 55356 Hennepin County has developed electronic forms of certain property information databases.llennepin County makes reasonable efforts to produce and publish the most current properly information available.The viewer should understand,however,that Hennepin County makes no representation or warranties,either express or implied,or as to merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose regarding the accuracy and/or completeness of the information contained herein. RECEIVED # 3935 CITY OF ORONO Item 05 Date Application Received: April 18,2017 O�T Date Application Considered as Complete:April 18,2017 VO 60-Day Review Period Expires: June 18,2017 a a To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator •kESHO�t From: Jeremy Barnhart,Community Development Director Date: May 15, 2017 Subject: #17-3936,Orono Public Schools,685 N. Old Crystal Bay Road, Conditional Use Amendment Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a conditional use amendment to permit the construction of an addition to the maintenance garage and after the fact approval for an outdoor grill areas near an existing pavilion. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit amendments as proposed. Background Maintenance garage. The school district proposes to remove two small sheds, approximately 1400 sq ft, and replace them with a larger 64 by 96(6144 sq ft) building to be connected to an existing garage. The buildings will be metal sided, and match the existing structure. The buildings will house ongoing maintenance operations of the school district property and facilities. Also included in this project is paving the existing gravel parking lot, and adding 3500 sq ft of asphalt in-front of the garage doors of the new building. Outdoor kitchen. The school district,with the rotary,constructed an outdoor'kitchen' adjacent to an existing pavilion on the property in fall of 2016. Since the'kitchen' is an expansion of the building, a Conditional Use permit is necessary. The kitchen consists of an approximately 280 sq ft patio, concrete counter, and a propane grill. Applicable Regulation:Conditional Use Permit(Section 78-916) The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council may grant a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) as the use permit was applied for or in modified form. On the basis of the application and the evidence submitted,the city must find that the proposed use at the proposed location is or will be: 1) Consistent with the community management plan; The community management plan guides the property for institutional uses. The school district operations falls into this category. 2) Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as required by article V, division 3 of the City Code; Schools are a conditional use in the RR-1B zoning district,as are accessory uses. The kitchen is 177 feet from the closest l FILE#17-3936 May 15,2017 Page 2 of 3 lake property line. The maintenance garage will be 724 feet from the lake. Lake Classen requires a 150 foot setback. An existing interior property line runs through the existing school buildings,this property line issue should be addressed. 3) Adequately served by police,fire, roads,and stormwater management; The additions are adequately served. 4) Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system; the additions are adequately served. 5) Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; This statement is true. 6) Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is planned to be used in the future; these improvements are in the center of a much larger school complex and are not expected to impact any adjacent property. 7) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; This statement is true. 8) Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; This statement is true. 9) Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area or have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses; This statement is true. 10) Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and activities likely to disturb surrounding uses; Screening or buffering is not recommended. 11) Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise,glare,vibration, odors,fumes, dust,electrical interference,general unsightliness,or other means; This statement is true. 12) Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties,traffic congestion, or unsafe access; The proposed additions will not add additional measurable traffic. 13) Designed to take into account the natural,scenic, and historic features of the area and to minimize environmental impact; The kitchen is sited to preserve views from the pavilion,and will not impact views from the property.The shed is located in the middle of the property. 14) All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; no lighting is proposed and 15) Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare.This statement is true. A CUP may be granted subject to such conditions as the Council may prescribe. Additionally, a CUP shall remain in effect as long as the conditions imposed by the City Council are observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the city from enacting or amending official controls to change the status of conditional uses. Septic System Status The property is served by municipal sewer. The proposed additions are not expected to increase service demand. FILE#17-3936 May 15,2017 Page 3 of 3 Analysis The kitchen is located on a lot that is 16 acres in size, and the maintenance project is located on a parcel 32.95 acres in size. The projects are not expected to be visible from off the property, and are not likely to cause any impacts on adjacent property owners. In terms of the scale of improvements already made,these two projects are minor. The projects add minimal hardcover to the property (1715 sq ft or 0.001% of the intermediate school lot), and zero hardcover with the 150 foot lake yard. The garage space will be 30 feet from an interior property line, as required,though the existing building falls within the setback. Staff finds the projects appropriate given the existing use of the property and minimal neighborhood impacts. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find the proposed projects satisfy the requirements of the CUP? 2. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Maintenance building plans Exhibit C. Kitchen/ patio plan Exhibit D. Project location map Exhibit E. Narrative Exhibit F. Property Owners List and Map PC Exhibit A 17-3936 City of Orono Conditional Use Permit Application Street Address: Application# /7.- 3 9 3h7 /�T 2750 Kelley Parkway a ` O Orono,MN 55356 Date Received: `�-// Er//7 Main: 952-249-4600 Staff: c� fax: 952-249-4616 Fee: $700 -� .1 i "A. Mailing Address: — '�$, t ' ` P.O.Box 66 Escrow: $700 / NA L. H . G Crystal Bay,MN 55323-0066 Notes: likFS0 � Please complete. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incomplet/e� applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. b SITE LOCATION: $5 iJ OOkiL_t1s..k I &I i#- Nj0/000 till c53$ . DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: SCG A+- L. �© ,,,�r".e w`4 (attached additional sheets at necessary) APPLICANT INFORMATION: *check here if Applicant address should be used for billing Applicant: (`[Jv. &cl—oly is - '1-14 s 1-t t'‘ JAI O Phone(Primary): --Ii)5Z- $3 5— Mailing Mailing Address: (pg5 A/ Olot Cort s lye ) (3 Q01 City: 17/Q i o ZIP: S-5-3 5-6 Email: 'Z'rv►l:.c01 g 0Ov%O& .jl:jam $1Y1 s/45 PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: Xcheck here if Property Owner Is same as applicant 0 check here If Property Owner address should be used for billing Name: Phone(Primary): Mailing Address: City: ZIP: Email: APPLICANT AND/OR PROPERTY OWNER: • Certify that the information supplied is true and con-ect to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant and property owner recognize that they are solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject It until it Is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of its potential merit. • The Property Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff,consultants,agents,Commission and Council Members for purposes of Investigation and verification of this request. • Property Owner and/or Applicant acknowledge they must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or property owner Is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant/owner and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. • Information will be distribut; via emai Applicant Signature: 1,Lti - Date: ii ;11 1 Applicant Signature: i Date: %t. Property Owner Signature: �-�= ' ' Date: Y`I lr/17-- RECEIVED Property Owner Signature; Date: APR 1 8 2017 CUP Application-January 2017 Page 4 # '' 9 3 6 CITY OF ORONO , ---;5,..0.,v0 City of Orono 12 't Ti , - -- Pre-Application Meeting Form G., lkEtio lBl- (This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting.) For cN"k .� ,,,.^j• 5,•A ;...,:i4.1-......ii,-..:,„,v. Atzji ::,.i,..-0-..,._.•i.. i ' .v i ':9 .,1-t 4 ` �1t n T Y;Q •�1N': l fill...',! ,v•�4..jdGt• ''�v • :j10 4. • 41417 -r" F-*•t i Yr.. ;:Fat:+ •$?' .+ 444"." r,h! «o•.:•.;,., rdA,!a"$'>i r . . 4r sir;.. i{ 11.. K•dry.•`-'".:P. "•'�+'.Yi�R'r••'f4:•;:"Jt v�i'.Cr r r {. ;. v...�'• ..:: ' :4.. j 5,.:. '. „.. a”. PC yx, + .<�. it 7y c �v C� +k!_+k std:,.!,.ar , What is the purpose of a pre-application meeting? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal,inform them of the procedures and requirements of the city code,and Identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION: � / � y4 kW Site Address: ik 011 C{ s- \ jc"'� R4� O�fop S53 S-6 Property Identification Number(PIN): 33 I 1� LIZ i 0001 Zoning District: Size of Property: 3Z.q S kits LAND USE REQUESTS: ❑Appeal of 0 Commercial Site 0 Comprehensive Plan ❑ Easement/ROW Administrative Decision Plan Review Amendment Vacation, without subdivision - 0 PID 0 PUD-Residential 0 RPUD,without 0 Ordinance Amendments 0 PUD-Commercial subdivision including Rezoning ❑ Other: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTS: Amend Existing CUP 0 Commercial/Industrial Use 0 Duplex Credit(per (per bldg/ ❑ Grading and filling— 0 Grading and filing— 0 Grading and filing—with 75 feet of OHWL 501 cy or more Wetland and flood plain (includes seawalls and retaining walls) ❑Guest House/ 0 Institutional 0 Residential/ Guest Apartment Type: 0 Renewal of CUP Residential Accessory Use Type: Applicant's BILLS AND CWty aff time and overhead Initials: costs only. OwnerESandRO/or: The Applicant land shalluse pay forapplication consultantfeeisfor ciexpenses incurred in review of Property this application and/or additional staff tim rot covered in initial application fee, as well as Owner's provide an escrow in the amount of$ .b1 to guarantee payment of the above. Initials: OTHER INFORMATION: *Please note: Your land use or dltional use permit application will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this form will a mp City staff. Applicant Signature: • t 1' Date: Iri 'f 1 Property Owner Signature: , 41'.25r‘.....--??' Date: kYIY`tRECEIVE D APR 1 8 2017 CUP Application—January 2017 � 3936 Page 3 CITY OF ORONO , PC Exhibit B 17-3936 1 .r:/y , 1 , - i -0 Fe • I • ....,:i ,...„.- . : ,, .• ,i-: , . .._ . / . ....._ -... i .....:- : / • .. l''1 ., \ . _ \ :..' \ \ \ -. .'.. \ \ At.9-?•-• ic,••• ,. $'',` : \ \ ,.; '.: , , , • 1 :--. ' . ;‘,...,,,, -30., • ,... `‘ ..,-. : .., .JLz...1 r•, 1 / ! . , ' f t• '. • ' 1.--" . /-% '' . , 1''' 4 • . ,, ! ., i' • 1-4 .---.--. / .1 , 1\''.., ' ' ' ' ii r t i co • ///// j, :' f i o 1 / //j • ' ' -I:V., / :'l• ' .- ', 5:io--‘... , .41, ' ' .... */ • /i • ••. / ,N 11,. -:. •- 'i•,•*0 /1/7- • e If'; t't '] e \ 1// e ,• •,,/. .., , • . -0 ;., , , / , ,/, d• ; ,. .; ,../ ,::' %/ ,,;%/1.,,./././,".:. , %/,,2;,,. ;•,,, ... .....• '' ,/,'2./ • .%Y /7 %%• •7 •',/, ;.. .„. ,7" , i • //' / i / //• -.-if • • -,:' //,'• :,'N% ' ' .L,,c.6',`,^)-,1,., \ - . ,//''',;• .,/ i /•,, . . .2, ..j, , /.. .. A.,,.:z ,,, ,„(Jte? •rn,1:- 4 1 „•,.,./; //.,, • /'•• , ' ,.,:•;y<•, • :„,/ •,•;";700 .•-.,,, 4, ,,,7 i• ‘. ,; 3 ''':••••-%•„/,,7,•-• . I; ' .,• , •• . •,,.//7%;„/ ,. \ / , i -•\ ' - •'k N y:- ,;,qc--,_•,-_,...._,.. .... • - /. • .. .. ... ... ... . . ',- ..- 1".'• • ... 1 1 . \ •.',";'''' `• \.7 iP../ / . ' \' ' , --:1 _ ' /\ t A , •;/11 \\ / ,\ tj 4" , / v . ..., '\\•\''':. \ / ,f4 \'f ..-', • 1) , . A / '''' "•i, ' 4:'-..., 0 ! . : 0 e-' r e iiii Ili ii li iz - " 8 4 g•• MI 1 11 111 i 0 0 1 I la 1111 IP 1 1 1 e 2 a m k 11111111i 101 li : 0 0 -13 tv I 8 I Ali 1 I 4 i 1 i 11131 III III i 1 I r Ili 1:1 1 1 —4-< ..... 1 Oh MAINTENANCE GARAGE EXPANSION ANNA ORONO 14,10(X3 ANDEESON-JOHNSON MM.kw ••••••••and I. en• SITE PLAN - ORONO.MINNESOTA NAN.*I.***ANNAN I CA.1.2;•4-- ASSOCIATES I C 1 2i LooscocAornonstar,Al/1.0004.CIACIORMIUM 0.1111100,10 ra!""natata_ ....... .... � � o U 0 0 RECEIVED APR 1 8 2017 CITY OF ORONO a a a 0 Iv RECEIVED APR 1 8 2017 CITY OF ORONO ui I I d ,..C-' CLASSROOM PAVILION fYl MODULAR CONCRETE RETAKING WALL rANW STEP TO FOLLOW ADJACENT N. IXB YAOD HEADER TO LANDSCAPE GRADERS INDICATED r , •—I CONTAIN PAVERS. v VERIFY 7-0`LONG.SET QI ONS'COMPACTED CL5 AGGREGATE.MATCH EDGE OF PAVILION FLOOR PAVILION WOOD.c — H j I AUG,,q 1117111.�11.;Ifl'i"C. II' I'1; •m• I -1 I [ ( f 1 i 1 I ALIGN Q I I l 1 11 1 7 1 Q EDGE OF CONCRETE 1•I A 1 C fI f J[ 1 ill •t➢ �3'O L�PAVILION OVERHANG SLAB.KITCHEN UNIT BAR OVERHANGS r I I I 14 .1!i! 11j•1 1 1 1 , BELGARD HOLLAND TYPE IM�����II MAIM=��== I ' F1O1����11 X10 OMIONM Rel Me CONCRETE UNIT PAVER.GASCONY XMMO�MI�.�: MIN10l_me�■MMO f]$j r - TAN COLOR.SET ON I'BED OF p...=I :: .I�I�� K 0�50-tr......e. ; 7 .ct .—.—.�I, COMPACTED CL5 AGGREGATE AND B■�olo1�■i■11 =I=M1111.11•111111= V SANG.PAVER,PATTERN AND INM1=1=1111.11 ■l l■1■BBINI=■1=1 INSTALLATION METHOD TO MATCH NIMBalallIBILINI---1a11 lei—___—I� EXISTING PAVILION FLOOR. ImmMI/NN11 1MI101M=■1Illem lia=illa nem Fon MINIMENSIIIIN MIME /•�%�' --. TYPOf • DROP ELEVATION I'AT IMM•=�t�' LIHTITIAm� CONCRETE ■1��o1��n 111��rYu Mo1 FOOTING. . o a 1/.�oTl 1■1N�M�M1��111 __ mmilM�I�IMR MIIINF�■1■1Ma� 11.SET REBAR FOR DRAINAGE OF FLOOR- 1 NICOLE OF WOOD HEADER, FF1imo F=MIMINIImml 111110111•M■111111111 AND TIE TO SLAB =0111,411M11•1=11 �1•B111��M11� AXI W000 HEADER TO I�/I Mo - ,�,immMO��� REBM AS PER �D EX.PAVILION I ENTRY CONTAIN PAVERS.VERIFY IIo1��■1I 11IIIImM�=� •.10. DRAWING BY m • .--1 1 o ■ 1 niallillialnamallNII 1BI1M.INE■BIro1m11.- 1 11'2-LONG.SET ON W Im��r.1n1 1111noI ME Salm ILEUaFRG O t'. !i COMPACTED CLS 1EMBLmNH 1�1�IM�1��111 SUPPLY AGGREGATE.MATCH In=PimUMW. �11�M�11� Ian�M��\I 1�1�1==��= `. PAVILION MOO. �__2FA■ 110mn MIIIIIMI 11N�m Mel MINIIMIIIIIIIMM= ....O.° /.'�■1■101. I 'Q. Q Q CABINETION AND,SIZE ARE Q O .Q Q - LOCATIONIWCSIZEARE i MiI i� APPROXIMATE.FIELD CUT L CONC.BLOCKS TO INSERT �1 I I f 1 I ('F) I PROPANE GRILL. •-('1111'1 1 1'I;1 I Ij`I 11 i 1 1 1- 1 .• I LOCATION AND SIZE ' [ 1 1 L II}t't .1 i1 1 1 1 111CONCRETE SLAB WITH 1 ARE APPROXIMATE I I 1 ]1 1 1 LII l i'1 1 1 I`-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 •ZT .�2 6 7 3,0 0 BOIIOTUBE FORMED 8'OM I� - FIELD CUT COUNTER •1P I 111 I ] I� •. I 1 ll 1 1 1 L CONCRETE FOOTINGS AND l _1 TOP TO RECEIVE. , I I T 1 ..1 11 1 1 - --0,5 0 0.5 0 REBAR,AS PER/EDBERG • • �� �Iv\�.1 SUPPLY RECOMMENDATION. KITCHEN APROXJMATE OUTLINE OF ■I,.1�,1 ■- t SET aLA6 ON 5.6E0 OF ` KITCHEN UNIT.mow •19• I 1 1 I I or I 7 COMPACTED CLS AGGREGATE 6 AND SET SLAB ELEVATION • •ZT SURFACE ELEV TL10N FLOOR ION KITCHEN AREA PAVING LAYOUT MODAARCONCRETE--''///1 3PIECEGRAND ISLAND KITCHEN KITCHEN UNIT CONCRETE SLAB KEY PLAN(NOT TO SCALE RETAINING WALL. SET,SUPPLED 6Y HIEDBERG ) STEP TO FOLLOW SUPPLY.CONTACT JEFF LOCATION PLAN ADJACENT GSTALLA,ION INSTRUCTIONS.FOR LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION ALLATI AS INDICATED EPDXY AND MIST A FE C LATION PRODUCTS.SANTA FE COLOR. NOTES RECEIVED 1.KITCHEN SET TO BE GRAND ISLAND TYPE, 4.PLANT 14 BUSH HONEYSUCKLE SHRUBS,ES PRODUCED BY ROCHESTER CONCRETE POT,AS DIRECTED BY ROLAND ABERG. PRODUCTS,IN 3 SECTIONS(GRAND ISLAND 5.STRIP OFF TOPSOIL IN KITCHEN PLAZA AREA APR 1 8 2017 BAR W/STORAGE;4 FT.BAR SECTION AND STOCKPILE FOR LATER USE TO BUILD UP W/GRILL AND STORAGE AND CORNER GRADES AROUND THE EDGE OF THE PLAZA. RETURN SECTION). 6,USE ANY REMAINING TOPSOIL AS PLANTING CITY OF ORONO 2.SEE HEDBERG KITCHEN PRICE DOCUMENT BACKFILL,OR PURCHASE EXTRA GARDEN SOIL (03/25/16)FOR KITCHEN SET IMAGES AND FOR THAT PURPOSE, FOR KITCHEN SUPPORT SLAB DETAIL(WITH 7.DISPOSE OF ANY EXCAVATED SUBSOIL. PIERS AND REBAR). 8.PLACE A 3"LAYER OF WOOD BARK MULCH THE ORONO SCHOOL 11 .... 3.AMASONRY SAW WILL BE NEEDED FOR IN SHRUB BEDS AND AROUND ADJACENT CLASSROOM PAVILION 'D 7 EV.leNBARM INSTALLING STN.5TL CABINETS AND GRILL. TREES.SHOVEL CUT A 4"DEEP TROUGH ALONG THE OUTSIDE EDGE OF THE SHRUB BED. KITCHEN ADDITION EDROLANDGAGER want LNIDSCAPE ARCHITECT L-1 0,4 PC xhibi D 393 "it i . ..,,,.....,____„, .. , ,_,,, : ,,,,Tip,;:. ....,., ,,, ,. ,0 ..41Sliaiiii ,., ,,• 4:5 ) • t, .._ y tai .t e y• "n ,, ,�.,. • r l' e.�. ' :. swir n 1 t: i w « 1 •00r - s1 r may, 0 , x • •"hi ti ti. _ n,Ff - * I wae . ; cel _ - t41 1 4,. _ , 4 i qm at r t .. 5 . r , Ill.,4117:1' / 'NO' r 1 ': & `, ''. 4, IP,, II '4' -- i s • PC Exhibit E ORONO 17-3936 V 03c Project Narrative 1. Orono Rotary Pavilion Grill- In 2016 Orono Rotary donated a grill area to the Orono Schools to be located at the Orono Rotary Learning Pavilion. The project proceeded without city approval. After project was completed the City asked the school district to receive a CUP amendment to allow this grill to be located on our grounds. The as built drawing for this grill area is attached. All hard surfaces are pavers which allow water to filtrate through to prevent any additional hard surface install. 2. Maintenance Garage Addition- Orono Schools plan to add an addition to the Maintenance Garage located at 685 N Old Crystal Bay Road. This addition will be 64' x 92' and will replace two older structures that are existing. During the addition,the current maintenance garage will be re-sided to match the new structure. The exterior appearance of the entire structure will appear as one building. Please see the attached site plans for review. RECEIVED APR 1 8 201 # 3 936 CITY OF ORONO PC Exhibit F • 17-3936 Hennepin Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map Provided By: Resident and Real Estate Services Date: 4/17/2017 28-118-23-33 28-118-23-34 28-118-23-43 Pill � . • •no ... aai�ii[Ta 111 . ■■ f „.4 „.,,,, - . , ,.;4-,-4„In..„,., a 9 y g n 33-118- ' 33-118-23-21 113-118-2 -12 :'!.,-_,';',,"i.,e.'''.1 IIIIIIIIIIImi -- ----•- — --_.:,,, ;,,, ,._. .. ..,,.. ._ tot-i.::;.-F 33- : 33-118-23-21 • a.i c, i C vi 33-118-23-23 33-11 :-23-24 c 3 33-11 :- 33-118-23-13 33-118-23-32 33-118-23-31 33-118-23-42 Buffer Size: 350 feet 0 120 240 480 ft Map Comments: IIII 11 I t l 3311823210002 RECEIVED For more information contact: SCHOOL DIST NO 11 685 Old Crystal Bay Road North Hennepin County GIS Office Orono,MN 55356 APR 1 8 2017 300 6th Street South Minneapolis,MN 55487 gis.infglhew�ypi�.ys 3 6 CITY OF ORONO •a/�s�j•, J` 19 RUN DATE:04/17/2017 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) PAGE:I 38 33-118-23 12 0002 PROFESSIONAL PROP ORONO LLP 2765 KELLEY PKWY ORONO MN 55356 PROFESSIONAL PROP ORONO!LP 835 PA RTE N W OOD RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 12 0004 CITY OF ORONO 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO MN 00000 CITY OF ORONO 1335 BROWN RD S WAYZATA MN 55391 38 33-118-23 12 0007 H R A CITY OF ORONO 2700 KELLEY PKWY ORONO MN 55356 H R A CITY OF ORONO 1335 BROWN RD S WAYZATA MN 55391 38 33-118-23 13 0021 PINE CORNER PROPERTIES LLC 550 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N ORONO MN 55356 PINE CORNER PROPERTIES LLC 550 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 21 0001 SCHOOL DIST NO I I 765 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N ORONO MN 55356 ORONO IND SCHOOL.DIST NO 278 685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 21 0002 SCHOOL DIST NO 11 685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N ORONO MN 55356 ORONO IND SCHOOL DIST NO 278 685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 23 0002 RE DUMAS&K G DUMAS 3025 WAYZATA BLVD W ORONO MN 55356 ROBERT E&KATHRYN G DUMAS 3025 WAYZATA BLVD BOX 607 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33.118-23 24 0001 OP5 ORONO LLC 595 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N ORONO MN 55356 OP5 ORONO LLC 1660 HWY 100 S#400 ST LOUIS PARK MN 55416 38 33-118-23 24 0002 OP5 ORONO LLC 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO MN 00000 OP5 ORONO LLC 15250 WAYZATA BLVD 4101 WAYZATA MN 55391 ATTN TOM GONYEA RECEIVED APR 1 8 2017 3936 CITY OF ORONO Hennepin Hennepin County Locate & Notify Receipt Provided By: Resident and Real Estate Services Print Date Mon Apr 17 14:53:08 2017 This is a receipt only with 'paid'stamp or cash register receipt attached TOTAL COST: $25.00 Company or Homeowner Name: Justin McCoy Contact Person: 952 449 8345 Subject Property Address: 685 North Old Crystal Bay Rd, Orono Comments: 350'3311823210002 Buffer Distance: 350 feet Mail Label Count: 9 38 33-118-23 12 0002 38 33-118-23 12 0004 38 33-118-23 12 0007 38 33-118-23 13 0021 38 33-118-23 21 0001 38 33-118-23 21 0002 38 33-118-23 23 0002 38 33-118-23 24 0001 38 33-118-23 24 0002 RECEIVED APR ? ' 3936 CITY OF ORONO Item 06 Date Application Received: 04/19/17 O�> Date Application Considered as Complete:04/19/17 60-Day Review Period Expires: 06/18/17 *11(tHC: To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission MembersDoug Reeder, Interim City AdministratorkFSHo�� From: Melanie Curtis, Planner Ince Date: 15 May 2017 Subject: #17-3937, Black Bear Builders o/b/o John Brooks, 905 Ferndale Road West, Variances Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting approval of hardcover and setback variances in order to construct a concrete pad and a generator. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. Background The applicant is proposing to construct an approximate 3 foot by 6 foot concrete pad to support the installation of a natural gas fueled generator less than 75 feet from the ordinary high water level(OHWL)where no hardcover or structures are permitted; and within 30 feet of a potential (undelineated)wetland. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-305&78-1279-Setbacks: LR-1A Required Proposed Rear/Street 50' principal structure 44'generator pad Wetland 35' 30'from the undelineated wetland /931.5' contour on the east side Lakeshore 75' 26' The property is a peninsula and there is no adjacent Average Lakeshore lakeshore lot on either side to impose an average lakeshore setback requirement. Section 78-1680-Hardcover Calculations: The applicant's proposal results in an additional 19 square feet of hard cover to be located within the 75-foot setback. Stormwater Total Area in Allowed Existing Proposed Overlay District Tier Zone Hardcover Hardcover Hardcover Tier 1 120,920 s.f. 30,230 s.f. 17,693 s.f. 17,712 s.f. (25%) (14.6%) (14.6%) #17-3937 15 May 2017 Page 2 of 5 Applicable Regulations: Lake and Wetland Setback Variance(Sections 78-1279 &78-1605) The generator and pad are shown to be 26 feet from the OHWL and within 30 feet of a potential wetland. The improvement will be located on the street"side" of the property's lakeshore and will not be visible from the lake. The City's wetland regulations were amended at the May 8'Council meeting;an accessory building/structure no longer requires a delineation.The wetland on the property has not been delineated;the required wetland setback is 35-feet.Staff used the best available information to make the determination about setback. Based on the available topographic information from the survey and wetland shown on the Hennepin County aerial photo map, staff suggests the need for a setback variance as the proposed structure is 30 feet from the wetland edge. Hardcover Variance (Sections 78-1281&78-1680) Hardcover within the 75 foot setback is limited to those specific improvements identified in the Code.The 19 square foot generator pad is not an allowed hardcover improvement within the lake setback. Governing Regulation:Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health,safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. §216C.06, subd. 2,when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.537 Subd. 6(2)variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The variances requested are consistent with the general intent of the Ordinance. The requested lake setback and wetland setback variances are in harmony with the Ordinance as the lake views enjoyed by the adjacent neighbors will not be impacted by the improvement. The wetland setback, lake setback, and hardcover variances are reasonable and necessary as the logical location for the improvement is adjacent to and existing City utility improvement accessed off of the secondary driveway. Shifting the improvement away from the lake and the wetland,up hill,is difficult and adds the visual impact. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variances resulting in a permit for the generator to serve the residence in a residential zone are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. #17-3937 15 May 2017 Page 3 of 5 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The request to permit construction of a concrete pad and generator within the lake setback and possibly within the wetland setback appears to be reasonable as the adjacent properties will not be adversely impacted; the uniqueness of the shape and orientation of the subject property create separation from the adjacent neighbors;the proposed improvement will be located near an existing public utility improvement. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The unique shape of the property was not the result of actions by the landowner. The improvement will not result in diminished lake views enjoyed by neighboring properties;and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The lake setback,hardcover,and possible wetland setback variances will not alter the character of the neighborhood;there is an existing utility improvement on the property situated at a similar setback and location. It does not appear that the requested variance to permit the improvement within the lake setback will adversely impact views of the lake currently enjoyed by the adjacent property owners.The lake setback and hardcover variances are reasonable and necessary as the most logical location for the improvement is adjacent to the existing secondary driveway near the existing City utility improvements.The topography of the property creates difficulties in moving the improvement to meet the 75-foot setback.The hardcover for the property is below 25%and the new hardcover is mitigated by the excess greenspace on the property. Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn.Stat. §216C.06,subd. 2,when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78.This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is not applicable, as a generator to support a residential use is an allowed use in the LR-1A District. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling.This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The unique shape and orientation of the Property is not common in the surrounding neighborhood. The topography and the island-like nature of the property creates increased difficulties which drive the location of the improvement toward the lake. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The unique shape and peninsula qualities of the Property are not common in the surrounding neighborhood. #17-3937 15 May 2017 Page 4 of 5 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.Granting the requested variances will provide relief to the applicant regarding the lot shape,topography,and possible wetland on the property. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the requested variances will not adversely impact health, safety, comfort, or morals; nor will it be contrary to the intent of the Code. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The shape and orientation of the Property;the topography and possible wetland create practical difficulties affecting the Property; the variances are necessary and not merely serve as a convenience to the owners. The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Septic System Status The property is served by City sewer. Practical Difficulties Statement Applicant has completed the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B,and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Practical Difficulties Analysis The most inconspicuous and logical location for the generator and pad is where it is proposed. The improvement will be accessed by the existing secondary driveway;City's sewer and lift station improvements are approximately 50 feet to the east within an easement on the property and set closer to the area identified as a possible wetland. From the lake the improvement will be completely screened by the rest of the property itself. Due to the height proposed at less than 3 feet it will likely not be visible from Ferndale Road West without difficulty. Moving the improvement further from the lake would result in locating it within an area of steep slope causing a greater disturbance of the site. The wetland and lake setback variances are supported by the site constraints. Engineer Comments The City engineer has not reviewed the proposal.A complete review will be conducted at the time of permit. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? #17-3937 15 May 2017 Page 5 of 5 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning staff recommends approval of the lake setback, hardcover, and wetland setback variances for the proposed generator pad and generator improvements. The applicant should confirm the dimensions of the pad as the plans seem to require a larger minimum size than proposed.Should the pad increase slightly to conform to the noted minimums of 44"x 88" staff would also recommend approval. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Proposed Survey/Site Plan Exhibit D. Generator Plans and Elevations Exhibit E. Submitted Hardcover Calculations Exhibit F. Aerial Photos Exhibit G. MCWD Comments Exhibit H. Property Owners List Exhibit I. Plat Map PC Exhibit A City of Orono #17-3937 Variance Application Sinai Address: Application tr . A j 2750 Katley Ply V :MN 5635e I �Received: Main: 052.240.4600 Staff '' - u fax i6 dee: STOD._. Z ,C' P d.Bw,as I Escrow- 5700 ! $2,500 '��� I' C. Crystal Bay.MN 55323-0066 I Notes i KESMO� __. _. --—_ — t i Please complete. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. incomplete applications will ggl bs placed on Planning Commission Agenda. SITE LOCATION: i)vS-- ,fieRNAALe. A wear DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: __. "-, J STA LA-A-1'i ON O 4 C ons rt e rc. PAP F►2 (attach additional sheets as necessary) (rove,z,4TIM APPLICANT N*FORMATION: • check tare Iiaddress should be used for billing ` Applicant: l4c. r via %1A / 51144 el- C(+ 'ie t' �c1 Phone(Primary): TZ..- S ' - ,. .Z __. Mailing Address: 33; 7 . /-- C• fi' I'r."- ZIP 5-5 gjo Email: 5.44 e j:_, 6 L l 4,-- L ' 4a ..w .0 b•-.-1 PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: 0 check here If Property Owner is same as applicant Name O .Rt2 Phone 30tiedcc here If Properly Ownerr address should be used for billing (Primary): 'L-:- :1 • ♦ ...MAIM. _-____. ! -1 7" s" rte+ Mailing Address: '1 . "'�: , ► L• , NJ�ea 7" City: ✓ Email: j C. is r`o c IS S -o -1 W A . 2A 7-.4 ZIP:r"S 3 y l APPLICANT AND/OR PROPERTY OWNER: • Certify that the information supplied S true and correct to the best of hisiher krow4.clge. The applicant and property owner recognize that they are solely responsible for submitting a empires application being aware that upon failure to do so,the staff has no a*em Live but to refect it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of Its potential mere • The Property Owner hereby Illaulowfockilosand agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff,consultant*.agents.Corrrhwsion end Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. • Property Owner andtor Applicant acknowledge they must be present at as scheduled review meetings of tie Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or property owner is unable to attend a scheduled arrangements to have an autiortzed representative attend in place of the appiicantowner and*Ivies please make assigned to your(=Wt. City Planner• information wit be distributed via 1(o ,. Applicant Signature: Date: 47/�� 7 Applicant Signature Date: Property Owner Signature: +/t r• ,r bate' zt - IL- J `1 Property Owner Signature: Date: Vanence Appricardarr-January 2017 piltA 4 DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY In accordance with Minnesota State Statute 13.04 Rights of Subjects of Data, Subd. 2, "Tennessee warning", we would like to inform you that your request for a permit or license from the City of Orono or any of its departments may require you to furnish certain private or confidential information. You are notified that: 1 . The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. 3. The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permit or license. 4. tf your requested permit or license requires Council action to approve, some information may become public. 5_ You have certain rights under Minnesota State Statute 13.04 (see following page)to review private data on yourself. 6. Your full name is required to process this application or permit. } y C 4m P (3eLL B !ZOOkS First Middle Last 9o eRk)/ e rcvpt_.0 s Address l'"'A T4 s- c-) 9r2-' ii&qH City State Zip Phones (2 - - 6 t understand my rights as stated above. 4 Alltioadafte Signat re Variance Application-January 2017 Plage 14 John Brooks Responses to "Practical Difficulties" Criteria April 16, 2017 Proposed Generator Installation Variance Application PC Exhibit B #17-3937 1. Yes, my wife and I are frequently out of town especially during the winter now that I'm retired. We need a generator to ensure our home and its contents are protected in the event of a power outage in our absence. 2. We are on a narrow peninsula so entire property is near water. So required setback for generator from water and wetlands is a problem. 3. We plan to put the generator in a utility/service driveway area, not far from an existing Orono city lift station. It would be on the north side of our property and would not be visible from the lake. 4. Not sure if this is an "economic issue.'The variance request is to enable us to protect our home and its contents. 5. I don't think this is applicable. 6. I'm not sure if I understand this point, but I don't think it is applicable. 7. Not applicable. 8. Our house is on a narrow peninsula so, as stated in#2, our entire property is near water. 9. I would think this request is reasonable and would apply to others in similar circumstances. 10. We believe we have the right to reasonably protect our home and its contents. 11. We are located quite a distance from other homes. Generator will be top quality and fueled by natural gas. 12. Frankly, I would prefer not to have to install a generator.The project is expensive. But I have determined it is necessary due to past power outages and our increased travel and time away from home, especially in the winter. 13. Statement: Our practical difficulties are pretty straightforward. Due to power outages over the last 5-10 years we are concerned with increased travel and time out of town in our retirement years, that our home and contents could be seriously damaged in a loss of power, particularly in the winter, e.g.frozen pipes, disconnected security system, etc. A natural gas powered generator, online 24/7, will solve that problem. Unfortunately because we live on a narrow peninsula, the vast majority of our property is close to water and wetlands. So we think it's reasonable to request this variance. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR JOHN C. BROOKS �, _a_wAr As 6 aw IN AUD. SUB. NO. 184, & NORTH SHORE COTTAGE ACRES --����� sEcux+ "°`T°•s CARVER COUNT?, MINNESOTA / \\ I., / \\ / \ 1 \\\ A ----------------T • -------------- I I \� 4L rJ 1 1 /� \\\\ O`�Ij 107 • »-„ LAGOON / \ \ GLH E�9E• .�_ • e.r.00c.No.•eatnw - i7 / � "-« \\ 1 Duce Lor,m 1, / / \\ 1 I )/1 \ \A111.:4?(4\"..."'",,,,... . --,1 \� ,\ \�\�_ �/ 1 0 9 frit'. _____,,,,__-_.=,„-„-_-___,_..„r,,- err ,, \1 / it '� _ +lour,,,!" � �r, 17 \�\ �i//t /�/ ,/i%/%i/ era \ \ 1 1 \ Q ---::-..,:---,!•---.� tee'"-� _ .. lar __-a.J / i/ /�' > � Fes, ,. ----,a�.--___ -.7..7------....----- - --'"^---- /- /f EASING / ✓ h a / i 1 ."'-"> .. ,• =", `�"." -.,` - * //I. O/• _\ poyHOUSE m.1 .�\ .„'---:..k/-:: ,1::, ..„':-.*:�+ax -/ W ISI ' ‘`< C nor irI lrl 1, .moi i t Itt `-.--7 ` ,4-7-(x---/--,-,,d 11/ w f:gMV\* \ `.. `ems X71 I ."•e a,''t''` /// ''', I OESCRS'n10N OF PREMISES �,�\�," _ ]//,,,,,,,,,,- LEGAL / ,\ Lots 107,108,and 109 Auditor's Subdivision No.186,and Lot '3,NORTH SHORE COTTAGE ACRES "G - _ __ F -+.!iW.a'1i.'ai _e I �� o denotes eon ma-.er w as•a. - -" --_— .J G__ �'' --J `_- denote,existing spot elevation.mea ,ea level�l� LAKE a=—�- -- °°. (906.3) denotes existing conta.line.mem sea level dolun —St, Begs ` � er'x This survey are eased darn an assumed do�am. M I N N E T O N K A vey intenee to snow tre boundaries or t.above described property,;ne bonbon of two existing ealldings,spot devotion,topography,the locationf all doe"hardcover",and the proposed!motion of a proposed generator thereon It It does not purport to show any other improvements or errroachrtents. BROWNS BAY --- • l�'°y certify Mal '°"l : :I GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC. _ e..a ae sal.ei un.aw CIVIL ENGINEERS,LAND SURVEYORS,LAND PLANNERS _'�y0 -- "-- 445 NORTH WILLOW DRIVE,LONG LAKE,MN 55355 3-1-s7 rax S.Or,, a; ,I.u,( w,:,e.Ins — 952-473-4 t41 `— 17-106 1)--i96 Protector Series o w cn (0 . A U U 01 o Qo co . _ a' i' Q1 SERVICE ITEM0.2. _' _- - C•) I.. -OIL FILL CAP 1 EITHER SIDE! NOTES'. SD i O _OIL DIP STICK RIGHT SIDE I 1 MINIMUM RECOMMENDED CONCRETE PAD SIZE'1194MM 47"WIDE X 2256MM 88.8')LONG. D L 211. 11' RADIATOR/EXHAUST - OIL FILTER `RIGHT SIDE I REFERENCE INSTALLATION GUIDE SUPPLIED WITH UNIT FOR CONCRETE PAD GUIDELINES. DISCHARGE AIR AIR INTAKE LOIL DRAIN HOSE RIGHT EIDE 2 ALLOW SUFFICIENT ROOM ON ALL SIDES OF THE GENERATOR FOR MAINTENANCE 0 (BOTH SIDES) (BOTH SIDES) RADIATOR DRAIN HOSE I LEFT SIDE 1 AND SERVICING-THIS UNIT MUST BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CURRENT i ACOOLANT RECOVERY BOTTLE, LEFT SIDE � APPLICABLE NFPA 37 AND NFPA 70 STANDARDS AS WELL AS ANY OTHER FEDERAL. N ;1 L , --REMOVE COVER RADIATOR FILL CAP ROOF TOP STATE,AND LOCAL CODES i FOR ACCESS TO AIR CLEARER ELEMENT , LEFT SIDE I 3.CONTROL PANEL/CIRCUIT BREAKER INFORMATION. RADIATOR FILL CAP __ SPARK PLUGS LEFT SIDE . •SEE SPECIFICATION SHEET OR OWNERS MANUAL ' _ MUFFLER j SSE NOTE Il' -ACCESSIBLE THROUGH CUSTOMER ACCESS ASSEMBLY DOOR ON REAR OF GENERATOR. FF,,I -1 �� DRIVE BELT EITHER SIDE: 4.REMOVE THE REAR ENCLOSURE COVER PANEL TO ACCESS •1 -- � tt)++�. I-- THE STUB•UP AREAS AS FOLLOWS. L �'(ryj FAN BELT DEE NOTE 11 *fi t t� 'I.' .tt � SLATTERY LEFT SIDE -HIGH VOLTAGE CONNECTION INCLUDING AC LOAD LEAD DUIT CONNECTK)N I. +i 7#• 4 FF •• ' wee al MAINTAJ I ! NEUTRAL CONNECTION.BATTERY CHARGER 120 VOLT ACT5 AMP MAX)CONNECTION. J 'S-j SUPPLY TANK Flu w TC0 •LOW VOLTAGE CONNECTION INCLUDING TRANSFER SWITCH CONTROL WIRES. �" +,Lp REFERENCE OWNERS MANUAL 5.CENTER OF GRAVITY AND WEIGHT MAY CHANGE DUE TO UNIT OPTIONS. T • 'I t - 1 A, FOR REPLACEMENT 6.BOTTOM OF GENERATOR SET MUST BE ENCLOSED TO PREVENT PEST INTRUSION AND 443 .w✓ i 4, PART PERIODICLIRRECIRCULATION OF DISCHARGE AIR AND/OR IMPROPER COOLING AIR FLOW 7 Sj , 1 S, , -' 7 REFERENCE OWNERS MANUAL FOR LIFTING WARNINGS. �„ } g' .. - 8.MOUNTING BOLTS OR STUDS TO MOUNTING SURFACE SHALL BE SI&11 GRADE 5 I1�L ; - ji '+' ----REMOVE (USE STANDARD SAE TORQUE SPECS) -3._.• , : "„4/4i,„...„,,,,...,,,. '**'4''”-g • REMOVE COVER FOR 9 MUST ALLOW FREE FLOW OF INTAKE AIR,DISCHARGE AIR AND EXHAUST.SEE SPEC BATTERY 1 749.3 29.61 y^ ACCESS TO LUBE OIL SHEET FOR MINIMUM AIR FLOW ANO MAXIMUM RESTRICTION REQUIREMENTS. '' --..4187 �+-- GROUP ( MAINTAINER SUPPLY TANK 10.GENERATOR MUST BE INSTALLED SUCH THAT FRESH COOLING AIR IS AVAILABLE P,. (7.11 NEGATIVE GROUND CENTER OF GRAVITY REFERENCE OWNERS MANUAL AND THAT DISCHARGE AIR FROM RADIATOR IS NOT RECIRCULATED. PIN.077483 (SEE NOTE S) II.EXHAUST MUFFLER AND FAN BELT ENCLOSED WITHIN GENERATOR ENCLOSURE, TOP VIEW REMOVE FRONT PANEL TO ACCESS. r--VICE ACTION LATCH. ONE PER DOOR, EXHAUST MUFFLER ONE LIFT OFF ENCLOSED WITHIN CIRCUIT BREAKER- DOOR PER SIDE GENERATOR ENCLOSURE' SEE NOTE 3 +-758 (29.81— DOOR TYP OF GENERATOR 1. " ; T- 1 i l t�'�1 �, ; r, i. j ',REAR ENCLOSURE s + .� U - - 'y .2 g. I ) r: COVER PANEL .4.:...! ' % "� 1 a•. .. 4; (491) - - ,, SEE NOTE ¢ z. RADIATOR/EXHAUST j I I."- I't s ' 1 "�'"A '- t i DISCHARGE AIR I f .. ,., 'r OVERALL 1 T i :4 "'•F a '",,,t +a.. .,a ' 9 I 2 1. -.a^2 i "' ,>f � ,4,j.' TVP12 ( - nor .4--. .R:tir q ' r ... 1 `T USTOMER ACCESS I «.. . . S ov.'v,.> w ,,.:‘,../...:::,;.2/..,,: „.I PA EL ACCESS.CONTROL 7, 9 w. ....:.� a z..L.,, kG .o.ti., bwa I �._888 135'81 ____ BATTERY CHARGER 5 I�� 1857 473.1)TYP • 50 - I+--- 1000(39.4] LOCATED WITHIN -ft RA WIDTH 11 SEE NOTE 4 83). 1850 pe.e , SO FUEL LINE CONNECTION REAR VIEW j LEFT SIDE VIEW 3/4"NPT FEMALE COUPLING OVERALL LENGTH - - -- RIGHT SIDE VIEW I. kAl i _ WEIGHT DATA1 1 WEIGHT VIEIGR I•. �.B• ENG/MESON ENCLOSURE sHIPPMG WEIGHT �/ MATERIAL I GENSET ONLY SHIPPING RNID KG gin!NO ILB51 KG 0.661 ,1 y Ammo0.36m I 2LL 36KW ST 564(1255) 4411113) SID 03531 A 2Kw AL 545(1X12) I 44(9131 500[13001 { L 74L45KW ST I_59611313] AA MI . 640(1.411 ! Z —— DIMENSIONS.MIA!INCH] /I1) I 2 AL 46KW 1 Al. 572112601 _ 44 Nei 644 11 Mil iR/ 7 M " _ b *k o 0 — X D 1, 0 C, m C C) Cr n m® v 0 Z O -,...z GENERAL' CD = 36, 45 & 60 kW installation layout c. Drawing#0K8636-A(2 of 2) w -i „ a) W$ • o m° 0 a T L -„. J ` '^ c s J (� a� tWa' a c g _ n N. ii O R CL -j CO i 3 I i 2 , �' J Q ,Zow W G QQ� VVO a 2 igg Jg —` V 62 z .° rvZO I--<0 v Z w Yz� - 6 ■ -F.;. � 1 I lf,' ,r, I . t 1 ,: ` t+r ! w (�.� 451§, W i.�, ' W w W `, a_ zao $ o `' a $a m m t-- g 8 S, t O J h g- RECEIVED N L • s APR 1 q 2.011 o� CITY OF ORONO N s G E N E RAC Generac Power Systems,Inc. • S45 W29290 HWY 59, Waukesha,WI 53189 •generac.com ©2015 Generac Power Systems,Inc. All rights reserved. AA speafications are subject to change without notice. Bulletin OL0037SBY-A Printed in U.S.A. 02;27/15 # 3937 PC City of Orono Exhibit E �oNo Hardcover Calculation Worksheet #17-3937 Property Address: } - a.5 FE/A--0►CE .i4 (Tay. 1i/1CGKJ/ =e`ikEs,409-`a Prepared b Date: P y. /eOrvBE..2G , , $;c'rc//rt1', :.vC_ 3-/6-/,7 Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) CD Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Step 1: LISTING HgRDCOV In the following table identify all items of existing hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to Certificate of Survey (survey must accompany this form). Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict existing hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion. Key to Survey Item(Describe) Length x Width S Total Hardcover (Square Feet) 4 (Example) (Garage) (24'x 30') (720 S.F.) A NG y-J"e 3-0.10 S.F. B 4''/4,21rf-,G �S Y S.F. C Bit LcKTOPvE I./J FR ✓ A Olt �i- ? 9 S6• S.F. D Cn.,IC /4rie g4 4.4.-yr../c. t 1TFps V9Y S.F. E CO4.,r. 17`)C 2y� S.F. F _COA,C. ,ADS 2 B3 S.F. G . .licca- v .17,.c./..:,' z' S.F. H '-e':-A-'L, rT€9S To a/Err/ .tie g7rr' r/lc-'_t 3 3/ S.F. PA //FRY d/.2 u.i;rp r,Pg' 4t' r%,9.1' "f' /E.di S.F. J J-70 a:E s CaAJc ruR e 6 2 S.F. K R6'7. ':///fr' ' 441444,a 6 2 9 S.F. L STddiE BORlFf! f S/ S.F. M STE//JLq P7-0.1-,E_- /8 S.F. N ' S.F. N 0 S.F. PS.F. Q R _ S.F. S S.F. T S.F. T S.F. V S.F. S.F. W WS.F. Y S.F. S.F. Z S.F. (1) Total Existing Hardcover l7, $$2 S.F. Excludable Hardcover(See City Code Sec 78-1684): K .1cAries✓ 6F LL,t4.t-f Rt,'r;silt`: e.A. O-7r 2CE+.16" 149.2 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. V SF (2) Total Excludable Hardcover 2lo S.F. (3) Net Existing Hardcover [Subtract line(2jfrom line(1)] /7, 6-93 S.F. (4) Total Lot Area '2o,92 o S.F. Proposed Hardcover Percentage ((3)+(4)] /cf 63 (Proposed Hardcover next page) Subdivision Application-January 2016 This is an information packet regarding Hardcover. Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained herein;however,if any information is not consistent with provisions of the City Code,the Code provisions will prevail. Page 18 City of Orono �oNo Hardcover Calculation Worksheet Property Address: l _ �: 905 F-ERA, 0A4 C ,t'O4 G W. (!70,yv et&0 k(5'I !4'rESMO,'t Prepared by: Date: GRa,v�CAC Al ©C /ArES, fit.,C. ...5-, -/6_i7 Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Mil Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Step 2:CPROPQSED HARDCOVE In the following table, identify all items of proposed hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to Certificate of Survey(survey must accompany this form). Include all existing hardcover items that are intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are split at the 75'setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion. Key tSurveo Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Total y (Square Feet) (Example) (Garage) (24'x 3(Y) (720 S.F.) A ext rrt,vG' yUl,/Ig' Sa ?O S.F. B I, Bz.i/4D/,vc Cy S.F. C „ SL.*rkr^ p *✓Q Qd/vF—iY _ 9 56 S.F. C i, Cl;kvC� /41/O f L.e 4 e x a ;Tf vS L/ 2 y S.F. E i, Ce.r,r, P.tTiQ 2 Ye) S.F. F ro,,i c . AA.0.5s _2_8_3 S.F.J G .// .0Eck- ' r76'F-r _ 2 90 S.F. H .• J -"i) j-p ---'.j• rc,u/F1? i /t-Gr?Tri�eF_iiG;•!=-E 3 3 / S.F. I z, ,JurAr cA Gt., 'rT SIOAF- O/' /✓a 'JT /8Y S.F. J ,, Sro4. f- CPA)C. Ce 6 2 S.F. K REr.//d//i. 444r4LS 62Q S.F. L ei Trove ea,4rieS Si S.F. M ,, J75 Pt m/t. r7C 4./FS /8 S.F. a N PAO/01 D �F.s�F.FA7'd2 /9 S.F. 0 P S.F. 0 S.F. - S.F. R S S.F. T S.F. U S.F. V S.F. W S.F. • S.F. X _ X S.F. ZY S.F. S.F. (1) Total Proposed Hardcover /7 9o/ S.F. Excludable Hardcover(See Cfty Code Sec 7&1684): K "or,rie.,.-• rrr.. n r azi7f,,,.0 r o it a-75' 'JrC,t, /89 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. (2) Total Excludable Hardcover S.F. /89 S.F. (3) Net Proposed Hardcover [Subtract line(2)from line(1)] /7, 7/2 S.F. (4) Total Lot Area /20`92p S.F. Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3)+(4)] /Y.6-5 % Subdivision Application-January 2016 This is an information packet regarding Hardcover. Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained herein;however,if any information is not consistent with provisions of the City Code,the Code provisions will prevail. Page 19 Item 07 Date Application Received: April 19,2017 �O • Date Application Considered as Complete:April 19,2017 N 60-Day Review Period Expires: June 19,2017 � a yF � To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator 4kFSHOQt From: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Development Director Date: May 15, 2017 Subject: #17-3938,TC Homes, Inc (Brian Tutt)/Nancy Bloms, 1325 Rest Point Lane, Variances: Lot Area, Lot Width,Street Side yard setback Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting street side yard , lot area, and lot width variances to permit the construction of a new home on property that is currently vacant. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the variances as requested. Background The property is currently undeveloped, and is fronted on three side by right of way.To the north is County Road 19,to the south is Rest Point Lane, and the west is unimproved alley. The applicant proposes a two story, 1686 sq ft(footprint) residential structure. The lot is substandard, due to size and width. The house proposed is narrow to minimize encroachments into the setbacks. The ordinance does allow terraces, steps, uncovered porches which do not extend above the ground floor level of the building to extend into a required yard. The covered entry way is required to meet the setback. Because a setback variance is requested, a variance from the lot size and width is necessary. The proposed covered entry encroaches into the side street setback 6 feet. Setbacks from the county road and Rest Point Lane are preserved. Access will be via the unimproved alley to the west. This alley also provides connections to the two residential parcels to the west via driveways. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-330-Setbacks: LR-1B DISTRICT Required Proposed North (Street) 35 79 West(Street side) 35 29 South (Street Front) 35 35.5 Side 10 10 FILE#17-3938 May 15,2017 Page 2 of 4 Section 78-330-Lot Area/Width: LR-1B DISTRICT Lot Area Lot Width Required 43,560 s.f. (1 acre) 140' Actual 15,590 s.f. (0.35 acre) 75' Section 78-1403-Structural Coverage: Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 15,590 s.f. (acre) Allowed: 3,118 s.f. (20%) Proposed: 1,686 s.f. (10.8%) Section 78-1680 and 78-1700-Hardcover Calculations: Stormwater Total Area in Allowed Proposed Overlay District Zone Hardcover Hardcover Tier Tier 2 15,590 s.f. 4,677 s.f. 3,029 s.f. (30%) (19.3%) Governing Regulation:Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health,safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn.Stat. §216C.06, subd. 2,when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.537 Subd. 6(2)variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The proposed use is consistent with the zoning ordinance, the proposed encroachment appears to be the minimum necessary. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.The property is guided for single family residential. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The applicant has developed a home that FILE#17-3938 May 15,2017 Page 3 of 4 meets with the constraints as much as practicable. Fully meeting the requirements for the ordinance would only permit a 30 foot wide home. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; This property is fronted on three sides by public rights of way,further the slope and vegetation limits building sites without drastic changes to the neighborhood and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The minimal encroachment for the covered entry will likely not impact the character of the area. Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn.Stat.§216C.06,subd.2,when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78.This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is not applicable, as the use for a single family residential is a permitted use in the LR-1B District. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling.This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The Council has suggested that small lots are a practical difficulty,this lot is one of the few in the neighborhood that has frontage on three sides. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The subject lot is one of five (with three street yards) in the immediate neighborhood,though this is the only one that has yet to be developed,and it appears to be the second smallest. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The variance is necessary to construct a modest sized home well under the hard cover and structural coverage limitations. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals,or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. No evidence has been provided that suggests the variance will impair health,safety,and welfare. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Based on the amount of hardcover and structural capacity, it appears the applicant has made an attempt to coordinate the project and the neighborhood. The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. • FILE#17-3938 May 15,2017 Page 4 of 4 Septic System Status The property will be served by municipal sanitary sewer. Practical Difficulties Statement Applicant has completed the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B,and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Practical Difficulties Analysis Applying the practical difficulties analysis, it appears that they are satisfied. The encroachment is minimal, the home is consistent in character with other homes in the neighborhood, there appears to be conscious thought to design the house for the lot, rather than fit a standard house into the lot.The covered entry Staff can anticipate comment regarding the use of the unimproved right of way to the west,this right of way is public and all property owners have rights to use the right of way. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Proposed Site Plan Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit E. Property Owners List and Map City of Orono PC Exhibit A 17-3938 Variance Application Street Add ess: Application# /7 — j�3 S ' 2750 Kelley Parkway 0 U i Y Orono,MN 55356 Date Received: t./_( 9_I 7 Main: 952-249-4600 Staff: 'VL6 fax 952-249-0616 Melling Address: Fee: $700 /)�!"1#1.2.7. ficit P.O.Box 66 Escrow: $700 / $2,500 CJ� � � . , G% Crystal Bay,MN 55323-0066 Notes: a7 kESB O' Please complete. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agenda. SITE LOCATION: cS IQ S f Pc, t1`( L c-11-NR ss DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: t; tdo f yobs, c'{/ m Ally S i ct R SQ-}- b0.cJ (attach additional sheets as necessary) APPLICANT INFORMATION: Iecheck here if Applicant address should be used for billing Applicant: "�c. H d rcw T.r+4 Phone(Primary): 4 I Y�a.1 — ar10 Mailing Address: .SO I IS c.trrt t,0,1-Nt C,j 1`4o ( CC) City: t)G- 40 \ ZIP: SS"3 7 Email: 1-j + .4- Ca + h p trc3 rdn t1 • Co Farr PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: ❑check here if Property Owner is same as applicant 0 check here if Property Owner address should be used for billing Name: .h r>r•S Phone(Primary): Mailing Address: City: ZIP: Email: APPLICANT AND/OR PROPERTY OWNER: • Certify that the Information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant and property owner recognize that they are solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so,the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of Its potential merit. • The Property Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff,consultants,agents,Commission and Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request • Property Owner and/or Applicant acknowledge they must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or property owner Is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant/owner and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. • Information will be distribut a e 1. .7 Applicant Signature: Date: ` + q t Applicant Signature: Date: RECEIVED Property Owner Signature: Date: Property Owner Signature: Date: APR 1 9 2017 Variance Application-January 2017 Page 4 # 3938 CITY OF ORONO DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY In accordance with Minnesota State Statute 13.04 Rights of Subjects of Data, Subd. 2, "Tennessen warning", we would like to inform you that your request for a permit or license from the City of Orono or any of its departments may require you to furnish certain private or confidential information. You are notified that: 1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. 3. The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permit or license. 4. If your requested permit or license requires Council action to approve, some information may become public. 5. You have certain rights under Minnesota State Statute 13.04(see following page)to review private data on yourself. 6. Your full name is required to process this application or permit. 5 rk‘ c, f\ Dc)...r. "ro +—I-- First Middle Last 1 3,s-0` [SGI S<N-T\ L,,& mac' Address - t)...,� c.)C\ An 0S 3 7 61 a- �a i -Y.ioy' City State Zip Phone tirrefeft f nd my rights s stated above. t Signature RECEIVED APR 10 ?017 Variance Application-January 2017 # 3938 Page 14 CITY OF O'— „) City of Orono Variance Pre-Application Y / Meetin Form xFSHo4 g (This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting.) For Office Use Only: City Planner: Meeting Date/Time: PC Date: Met with: What is the purpose of a pro-application meeting? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal, inform them of the procedures and requirements of the city code,and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: /327 E—tocil PO,w ,i w Property Identification Number(PIN): 07 - 117- 23-32_ ? Zoning District: Size of Property: /5-1 y 2 5-p DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REQUEST: ❑Average Setback 0 Side Yard Setback 0 Rear Yard Setback 0 Lake/Front Yard Setback 0 Hardcover 0 Lot Coverage 0 Lot Area 0 Lot Width BOther: 404° e p e Applicants (���Y``Dpc PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES: Owner and/or Applicant has received the Practical Initials: Difficulties Documentation Form, understands it as it has been explained to them, and is Property aware that it must be completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal variance Owner's application. initials: ApplicantsBILLS AND ESCROW: Owner and/or Applicant shall Initials: Pp pay for consultant expenses incurred - In review of this application and/or additional staff time not covered in initial application fee, Property as well as provide an escrow In the amount of$ to guarantee payment of the Owner's above. Initials: OTHER INFORMATION: *Please note: Your variance application will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this form will be completed by City staff. Applicant Signature: Date: Owner Signature: Date: RECEIVED APR 1 9 2017 Variance Application-January 2017 Page 3 3938 CITY OF ORONO PC Exhibit B - 17-3938 Practical Difficulties Documentation 1325 Rest Point Lane, Orono, MN 1. Lot is zoned for a single-family residence. 2. The lot has extreme challenges due to the width of the lot (75 feet), the side yard setback (10 feet) as well as the side yard ally way setback (35). 75-10-35=30 feet building pad. Most single-family residential lots have 50 to 60 feet building pad width to allow for adequate width to construct a single-family home. A 30-foot building pad width creates a hardship to design and build a single-family home therefore a variance is warranted. 3. The single-family home proposed will conform and enhance the neighborhood. Homes in the area that are not on the lake, are similar sized and 40+years or older. The home has curb appeal and will enhance the neighborhood. 4. This variance petition is not made for economic reasons. 5. N/A 6. The proposed single family home conforms with the zoning of the property. 7. N/A 8. Special conditions apply to this building site as it is smaller building pad due to the smaller lot width combined with the side yard setback and the large ally way set back. The narrow 30-foot building pad after the side and ally way setbacks creates a hardship requiring a variance in order to build a single-family home. 9. N/A 10. N/A 11. Granting this variance towards the ally way will not impair the health, safety, comfort, morals or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the zoning code. 12.The granting of the variance towards the ally way setback is necessary to alleviate the demonstrable difficulties of the small 30-foot building pad and is not sought for convenience. PC Exhibit C 17-3938 The Gregory Group, Inc. INVOICE NO. 86261 d.b.a. F.B.NO. 1093-28 LOT SURVEYS COMPANY SCALE: 1" = 30' Established in 1962 LAND SURVEYORS • Denotes Found Iron Monument 0 Denotes Iron Monument REGISTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA 0 Denotes Wood Hub Set for 7601 73rd Avenue North (763)560-3093 excavation only Minneapolis,Minnesota 55428 Fax No.560-3522 Denotes Existing Contours Itr u P 4 u r d T P r1 i f t r tt i P T/C HOMES /-.X._., Denotes Proposed Contours x000.0 Denotes Existing Elevation Basis for COO.o)Denotes Proposed Elevation bearings is Property located in Section Property Address: 1325 Rest Point Lane -.01111F- Denotes Surface Drainage assumed 7,Township 117,Range 23, Orono,MN NOTE: Proposed grades are subject to results of soil tests. Hennepin County,Minnesota Proposed building information must be checked with approved building plan and development or grading plan before excavation and construction. Proposed grades shown on this survey are interpolations of proposed contours from the drainage,grading and/or development plans. NOTE: The relationship between proposed floor 4:02008 elevations to be verified by builder. 18" L.--.26.R=716 78 959.0 Proposed Top of Foundation _78 Meas,, 958.7 Proposed Garage Floor • L_28.2 p/at red 95 1.0 Proposed Lowest Floor bite \ 959.9 1\\ CC-) / , Type of Building Power ✓ �`Le ,A Fullbasement Walkout Pole I \ 16/714/ \ a.Y /1/ Q B� \\ bite bit O. / s 959.5 959.4 '988.,5 I. 4•-s. bush e 966.0 \ count X77°48386 W 6 f mow- 966.6 \ bush e 988.',9 on r/w •11 Measured 957.5 957.: • mow- `\ Proposed Hardcover 966.9 Area Mowed \ Lot area = l 5,590 sq ft "by Neighbor 963.2 Building = l,656 sq ft 962.6 Driveway = 93/ sq ft Deck = 4/2 sq ft WOODS 976.2 Total = 3,029 sq ft 20 976.9 mow- 976.2 x Percentage = l 9.43% x 977.0 mow- 972.5 wde 974.6 x 973.7 bit e 971.4 (P CP -67. 2 5 Walls as Q IJP W Timber TAN 970.7 \ Required O o 966.6 Wall DM 966.0 966.6 966.5Q.. c :, O o.) 11\\ x mgejr '0966.2 O / ,Sign 4655 o o' (Al 0 0" A 00 �'.• 2 10.0 Existing Building 967.I o b t e w No. 1345 N�a 964.62 1.3 O tob 11‘ 4� .3 o N' 2-5T-F2 o= 964.7 • o op \ k*o X 0 Na 1315 o bite �a� N ife d,. 96/.32 0 e ...i• e, o 962.4 d 955.9 9< 961,'g 6 965.5 0- N Egress Proposed Well s- o. 60' ,, Residence bite x o, 10.0 wde 956.6 \ 954.3 954.9 \ 6�\A 0952.4 7 950.5e._�15'6 11eck4"095 .9/�,t x 952.4 �- � ' o'• 4IW 'b \--<, .. o Top Spike 2'Cantilever w 952.60 Top Spike5.\'Ll-\ \` 948.29 ',3., I i 949.2 5"cmp Inv 5.° 0 945.43 Ni 46.6 51°0(00 ‘f 947. 7 bite 945.4 949.26 I 5'plastic my bit e 942.69 946.16 bite L / ..bit c 946.16 y rOin- If' 945.05 5t Sze The only easements shown are from plats of record or information Lot 74, TONKAVIEW GARDENS provided by client. Hennepin County, Minnesota I certify that this plan,specification,or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota Surveyed this 13th day of April 2017. ' Rev Drawn By y. Dr„„ / Signed 4.' Gregory 1 asc Minn.Reg.No.24992 F:\survey\tonkaview gardens-hennepin\74\tvg-74-fbl09328inv86261.dwg ' T .suold*soul uo(i. 10)forLC-inre9L eue.td--noasuuliAl.6106031-tiVoN enu•AV Pittl,WIZ 3- s9 suoiss!wo pun c.o...eq eeesuocim eq4) r: ---- 'of420 a 000p, lt,t,1lVe t-tes.-toPuV TIT Poo 00”*Pute emu* ojlimile i--- 1- •uogon.ileuoa eepaq pap°,°JD eeolep p. suo!sueusep%elou Kunton.ile eo OJOS OOOUJ 0,s.,,,d asp 41 metneJ Hogs Jour.eLooti p,,,,, SE,X56OSPREIZIONGEICTEirP "1 1r 61 411 ; si 01004u03 10....0 otu 1001100 OJO cupid eseqi. Q,111111111111ffo, 11- e.ris Demo ol*pow ueeq soy pope AJen3 eeep Or' )1 4 4 111 1 411 A 0 . _ ....... .._...... ...._.. . . . ___._ aNj I• I a 1 rts•-. .E•g*. ,..1..„ ,,.... .." ,/ .7 . —-- — ..........___ • 1' --- I p . .,0 _t•' \,. *s. , i ,,, -..._. . ,. / . ..__... I , f,.1 r • 1 il -- — • ; ! c 1-, • I .1 I i. .!H. " rr", , 17&-...": 1"L 11-11-1, , 1 ' Ii ildi,I11 ; I :It 1; Ill' Ill ! ,!H ;1, 0,,, i , .....i • . II, ,11, I 1 I i i• H i II1, 1:1; 1111 i- 1 i 1 il! !,H ;kii I ii 11 , ,,, ,- l''• , --1 i l 4 i . '1‘'11 ,' II . 1 ' ' tH 1111,11 , i'I i :: I' I li Iiii,' (11111', 1 I..., ill.L..11..1 ,J H ,1,i 11.'1,, I: 1 i..-"6 ' - ! / . , i , :: ';',N , .. , , 1, : • ,1, , ,..`,,It,'"•.,, ' 1 ').,,,,,/^,- " f! --] ; r ' I= , J • .,( t-,.... --) 4 . 1,1,, ,-•, : -.:. -.,..—\•,\—:::*:—,..._ 1 r,. t iii .—41 I - on NMI ' , f..)% • ,, 11 ,.-a 41 1 1 I 1' ' '': ,;,,Ij' '' i-C,'—' , ' •'''4' t::: 1 `.'7Z4!'.,r . r i • • -• . : ,,,,k,••••:: • .,---•:-— _1 . 1-, . , 6-: • '.- .i,'. t ,-- -' ,-..A.,4, ' '; Mint i' r 1 1 4 , —1 / . i Ih*. .,_424-t jfi'k I ilgp.'4'fr.7 .A: . ! .-,',... ,.''- -',',..,:al:, .r J.,,,t ,....';,. ,iff:.,* .,I IIIVIR } I 1 1• , • 1 , . i:,, ,',T---'41 ':•.,'.-.b:!'ill.,!,.).._.:...'h':."':'-il ...-t:1*4 1 I.. I.;I'11 --i: —1.4. ... , . \ , ,.--,..?"'‘71. '4'.t-t tt oe--t-:` , ' : . 6'• ' 1 ' —7 1 .\,\,... 1 -4.- 'It.., , . . 1 1 • 5 / 7 ,..... , I I 1 1 i ti, 1 .. , t- 15 %- li i 4.4 1t 1 - _.- \•,, „.........tct_.4,........,...„,,,,, \ . a ,,.-- ..-----------' NN ---,........, _____ j q c I- 1 ,_104 a,, \ 7 I41 L o ....,A‘':\-- 1 .9 • �_?\_. t'*'___„,„,E-••?'' ?, ` ...-�^¢I'',., %% -- i' 76.-1 t‘ \ 7l. .\_._:, `-* ..,,. / .. ef;/:, 4\ 4 `� �-0 I I1 , 1 r N 04 L :71. I V _ A l noe4 i ! F t\� a4 -"414+4‘,24,1 � E 7 II r- -i+ di-4'1 'i�gi�1:_ 1tit 0 1. ��'�I Irl �j ___-.9.��I-.--.. L-I AI {rI i— �1 Fi ' � � � � =+r-+ �`a� i `q I � ;I ; I l'-' nn II 1 CD i _ ... —, I ; 12 I 6 l 1 9 44i 1141 `a Ii 9..0 ! , i 24,i il I oI I j l' sok I I ,l j n I' . j ` " — — \ \ .e"74:74 !n r — ___, +i � i I I .D ('. o r L; I 1 I IV ft its+tP ii, roe r , 8. I ___ ifr i ' -3 1 < ,ii rj rizi,, %)., , ,,,........... ....., 4'-q" .F..0: j,„\11.- tt-1 fi- y „1 , 11, tr 0 t litli it Y -171:1,:rf-- t 11 ,,rr---r,14'k\ 1.----f I i i 1 _I I { � _ . �. j o ; I ; I it I * I)T re A16_ —• , rI f r' o i 11 �r. Itor `' '� 1) A -_ a Zt. % �v. 1 .y, r c w_ 1,, MIN111.111111 inETIEM 1111111 / 'f'P---e - -i: _ _ �_ i PIP P L hI r r_ ii 'trf- ''.4,-1. op ► t-- i I I ift, . f, 'tet Z 411•"1. a • *�"� ::::" _ { - - ' , I I , tet- _ Q � i��o. IS' ,i N L'', L cam' -J..t_o' �, d— 4 r i /T U- J V' 0 0 t Is •4 \ \ Y I � _ , ° a Ip- i! sI o ? � i —1 ! FF \ ... .. .. ,...�. ,. ,L- 1. .71-14 .-t—I1 Q (f--- di -, 7,.1_1_-_ i ,' J� m ri , z .0 2 ci,,,,b ,„ r, , , .,, tg gi 1 Tli_ ^� 'I &t 0 lit 4, �; I 1 , -,, El A- o-e4 1 . riI - ; ,� ___,g __ (r) t ) 1 X 11, ;� a _ dlii ki fill :II - a11?1 ' € - ' 1F4L, „ e i. g - y 1 ;1 1 I tilrtitwogAF 3 4{!41x3 .x F H 11X.J,nWx1'..; PA o I ! 1 l ,x-I l TT I —14 r I I I._I_ } u i_ o it J _,I. ,_4_ .1 - I A I li pt t_I i I )LLI_L s i; ri L It, L L_L 7 4. �t I t, ' ' I..L- (1- / A ' _T L I_ L.. i ! -1��i e-., J►�-ri,'P,t-,1e i :h-.+„`ark—c �'2 ;;11 f A : 1rj _41 / 1is j _ -, I =_e Fri ti \--I" /8 \ 'N 4_ 1 , \ ,k ,.1 / -) . \ 1 _..1.-: a� II 1 N � ori , i 0 I , \ I 1 _ I ___,: , fi 11 -0 I _J' 1. : _ i t 1 ill 10 D R A ) , xT — lin ill J 1 r 1E1 1- 7 it i A 0,7041441.4 —t. 4 r-i141Z 4 r 1 'i 1 A ..lidk \i'l 11 jo,etitly4 1,,v .fit 'r-%1 1}-4 ill - 3/ 4 Ji a 1-4 it -4 11 .1' i‘ li i 1 11,,ile•A'' jl° ll a-1E:7 :-1--, -crWL I -.-=' -i' w 1 2 ' 4ielajtio i 1k 73.2z ;Pt i 0 i i1' f 4-01Pill fl l(r- ii; )41 '1 Ad ,t Ili c q--ti ' El g sirt 1 4,41L,44, el.iii,1-2.• _LI iii 111 IT_ 1,1i tiii,_ , 34 14-1/ .r c ,4-4,1 4J1t:,1 li t' la 014 4k'l t ' N Flo' ldi A y f7 41,1g11 JO ) t-J,91i#C41 Ji i 1 itd V:_tl; 11,14/ tip IiV"-.11 _41 A4 ---) ' ll. 1 a41' 41-41) 0 g 4104 'L 1, 1 --- — - — - PC Exhibit E 17-3938 Hennepin Hennepin County Locate & Notify Receipt Provided By: Resident and Real Estate Services Print Date Thu Apr 20 13:20:08 2017 This is a receipt only with 'paid' stamp or cash register receipt attached TOTAL COST: $37.50 Company or Homeowner Name: - Contact Person: Brian Tutt ‘-"L'if vet) Subject Property Address: , APR 25 2017 Comments: C11Y p�CRCNO Buffer Distance: 350 feet Mail Label Count: 30 38 07-117-23 31 0016 38 07-117-23 31 0017 38 07-117-23 32 0002 38 07-117-23 32 0003 38 07-117-23 32 0014 38 07-117-23 32 0024 38 07-117-23 32 0025 38 07-117-23 32 0026 38 07-117-23 32 0027 38 07-117-23 32 0030 38 07-117-23 32 0031 38 07-117-23 32 0034 38 07-117-23 32 0037 38 07-117-23 32 0038 38 07-117-23 32 0039 38 07-117-23 32 0050 38 07-117-23 32 0052 38 07-117-23 32 0053 38 07-117-23 32 0054 38 07-117-23 32 0056 38 07-117-23 32 0058 38 07-117-23 32 0059 38 07-117-23 32 0060 38 07-117-23 32 0061 38 07-117-23 32 0062 38 07-117-23 32 0064 38 07-117-23 32 0065 38 07-117-23 32 0066 38 07-117-23 32 0067 38 07-117-23 33 0012 # 3938 6 ZC VED • Hennepin Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map APR 25 2017 Provided By Resident and Real Estate Services O. afla/OODNC; •..);:,,, (5'; rta ` u �t G,r (4) (3) 19) (21) (m) 110 (19) sor ,11 O ase a 7f S(3t) O� 42, i, 1'a�e PP Algt 1 liql, (231 (2q (11) (13) rest Q O� (12) (7) (6) (5) Buffer Size: 350 feet 0 60 120 240 ft Map Comments: I I I r I l l l 1325 Rest Point Lane Orono For more information contact: MN 55364 Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South Minneapolis,MN 55487 gis.info@hennepin.us # 3938 E�4E_CE VED RUN DATE:04/20/2017 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) PAGEAPR 2 5 2017 38 07-117-23 31 0016 38 07-117-23 32 0031 38 07-117-23 32 0058 N I-� 1347 REST POINT CIR PINEGAR 1 60 RBEST POINT CIR 4705 NORTHASCHER SHORE D -'I ' i U I- ORONO ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 WILLIAM&REBECCA PINEGAR DAVID B&JENNIFER BOLES JR ANDREW H&TRACY K RASCHER 1347 REST POINT CIR 1360 REST POINT CIRCLE P O BOX 166 MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 07-117-23 31 0017 38 07.117-23 32 0034 38 07-117-23 32 0059 PREMIUM PROPERTY GROUP INC CHRISTINA C NILLISSEN MOLLY PORTERJCAMRON PORTER 1337 REST POINT CIR 1365 REST POINT RD 4695 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 PREMIUM PROPERTY GROUP CHRISTINA C NILLISSEN MOLLY G PORTER 215 WALKER AVE S PO BOX 814 CAMERON J PORTER WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 0814 4695 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0002 38 07-117-23 32 0037 38 07-117-23 32 0060 J HOUTMAN%K.1 HOUTMAN TRUSTS NI B&I.K GERLICHER J K LANGHANS&S LANGHANS 1340 REST POINT LA 1375 REST POINT RD 1366 REST POINT RD ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 JAMES HESSEL HOUTMAN MICHAEL B&LYNNE GERLICHER JAMES K&SHEILA LANGHANS KRISTINE JOANN HOUTMAN 1375 REST POINT RD 1366 REST POINT RD 1340 REST POINT LA MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 38 07.117-23 32 0003 38 07-117-23 32 0038 38 07-117-23 32 0061 E&T CHRISTIANSON JAMES H HOUTMAN TRUST ETAL AMY 1 MIGLINI 4725 TONKAVIEW LA 1373 REST POINT RD 1371 REST POINT LA ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 EARL&TERRY CHRISTIANSON JAMES HOUTMAN TRUSTEE AMY 1 MIGLINI 4641 TONKA VIEW LANE KRISTINE HOUTMAN TRUSTEE 1371 REST POINT LA MOUND MN 55364 1373 REST POINT RD MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0014 38 07-117-23 32 0039 38 07.117-23 32 0062 LARRY A GREENHAGEN ET AL M H HOXIE&K E HOXIE D S WALSH&A L HEIEN 4739 TONKAVIEW CT 1350 REST POINT LA 1354 REST POINT CIR ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 L GREENHAGEN&V GREENHAGEN MICHAEL.H HOXIE DENNIS WALSHiAMANDA HEIEN 4739 TONKAVIEW CT KARMEN E HOXIE 1354 REST POINT CIR MOUND MN 55364 1350 REST POINT LA MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0024 38 07-117-23 32 0050 38 07-117-23 32 0064 KATHLEEN G ASH REV TRUST ROGER KRAFT&SUSAN J KRAFT A LICURSI&R LICURSI 4615 TONKAVIEW LA 4680 NORTH SHORE DR 4655 TONKAVIEW LA ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 KATHLEEN 0 ASH ROGER KRAFT&SUSAN KRAFT ANGELO&RACHEL LICURSI 4615 TONKAVIEW LA 4680 NORTH SHORE DR 4655 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0025 38 07-117-23 32 0052 38 07-117-23 32 0065 ERICH K BLAUFUSS/E BLAUFUSS K J GROVER&S K GROVER C R SCHMIDT&A R SCHMIDT 4625 TONKAVIEW LA 1315 REST POINT LA 4685 TONKAVIEW LA ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ERICH K BLAUFUSS KEVIN J GROVER AND CHRISTOPHER R SCHMIDT ELIZABETH BLAUFUSS SUSAN K GROVER AMANDA R SCHMIDT 4625 TONKAVIEW LA 1315 REST POINT LA 4685 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 MINNETRISTA MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 38 07-I 17-23 32 0026 38 07-117-23 32 0053 38 07.117-23 32 0066 1 R ARRAHAMSON D ABRAHAMSON N C BLOMS&G L BLOMS JOHN&KRISTI EICKHOF 4629 TONKAVIEW LA 1325 REST POINT LA 4725 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 JAMES R&DAWN ABRAHAMSON GERALD&NANCY BLOMS JOHN&KRISTI EICKHOF 4629 TONKAVIEW LA 4195 FOREST LAKE DR 4725 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0027 38 07-117-23 32 0054 38 07-117.23 32 0067 A C SEVERSON&W L SEVERSON G T AHERN&C F AHERN D E KLINT&K A KLINT 4635 TONKAVIEW LA 1345 REST POINT LA 4731 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ALENA C SEVERSON GEORGE T AHERN DOUGLAS E KLINT WILLIAM L SEVERSON CANDACE F AHERN KIMBERLY A KLINT 4635 TONKAVIEW LA 1345 REST POINT LA 4731 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117.23 32 0030 38 07-117.23 32 0056 38 07-117-23 33 0012 STEPHANIE FERRELL S W HATCHER&C A HATCHER G D GANGSTEE&K GANGSTEE 1310 REST POINT LA 4685 NORTH SHORE DR 1374 REST POINT RD ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 STEPHANIE FERRELL STEVEN E&CHERYL HATCHER GARY&KATHRYN GANGSTEE 1310 REST POINT LA 4685 NORTH SHORE DR 1374 REST POINT RD MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 RUN DATE:01/20[2017 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) PAGE:2 Hennepin County has developed electronic forms of certain property information databases.Hennepin County makes reasonable efforts to produce and publish the most current property information available.The viewer should understand.howeser,that Hennepin County makes no representation or warranties,either express or implied,or as to merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose regarding the accuracy and'or completeness of the information contained herein. # 3938 Item 08 Date Application Received: 04/19/17 0 Date Application Considered as Complete:05/13/17 g- NO 60-Day Review Period Expires: 07/02/17 A To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator IkESHOLt From: Melanie Curtis, Planner mcc Date: 15 May 2017 Subject: #17-3939,John Bailey, 2807 Casco Circle, Conditional Use Permit Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a CUP in order to repair a 2014 lake slope failure which exceeds 500 cubic yards of imported and exported material. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the CUP with conditioned upon an engineer certifying the plan. Background The property owner is requesting a conditional use permit in order to repair and restore slope failures which occurred in his lake yard. In July of 2014,with a number of other properties around the lake,the property suffered catastrophic failures of their 40 foot high lake slope. Since that time he has been trying to develop a restoration plan that meets both the City's goals to stabilize the slope in a natural way, if possible,and stop the sedimentation into the lake;and his goals for stability,aesthetics,and lake access. The property owner has recently provided the City with a plan to restore his lakeshore slope.The project involves removal of the disturbed soil;sawtooth cutting the subgrade;and installation of: new compacted soil, a yard drain, drainage pipe, Filtrexx living slope stabilization pods, and stabilizing vegetation. A conditional use permit is required to authorize the work on the property as the restoration work will exceed 50 cubic yards of material within the 0-75' zone. Applicable Regulations: Conditional Use Permit (Sections 78-967; 78-1283;78-1285;&78-1286) The scope of the project will be limited to the area within 75 feet of the OHWL. In order to stabilize the slope the applicant is proposing to remove approximately 300 cubic yards of compromised soil material and replace it with approximately 500 cubic yards of angular soil to be compacted and restored as shown on the plans. Applicable Regulation:Conditional Use Permit(Section 78-916) The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council may grant a Conditional Use Permit(CUP) as the use permit was applied for or in modified form. On the basis of the application and the evidence submitted,the city must find that the proposed use at the proposed location is or will be: r FILE#17-3939 15 May 2017 Page 2 of 4 1) Consistent with the community management plan; The intent for the proposed grading is residential in nature,is consistent with the permitted uses for the Property,and is compliant with the zoning code and comprehensive plan. 2) Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as required by article V, division 3 of the City Code; The proposed slope restoration, grading,and plantings are residential in nature and are compliant with the zoning code. 3) Adequately served by police,fire, roads,and stormwater management;This statement is true. 4) Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system;This statement is true. 5) Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; This statement is true. 6) Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is planned to be used in the future; The proposed restoration work within the 75-foot setback area will have no impact on surrounding lands and is intended to avoid further damage. Drainage patterns for runoff leaving the adjacent sites will not be significantly altered.Once completed the existing staircase and new plantings should be the only visual changes when viewed from the lake. 7) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; The proposed restoration work within the 75-foot setback area is intended to avoid further damage. Drainage patterns for runoff leaving the sites will not be significantly altered.The retaining walls should be hidden behind vegetative screening when viewed from the lake. The import and export of materials is necessary to restore the slope failure,once completed,it will have no impact on surrounding lands.The slope,once vegetated and landscaped should not have an adverse impact on the neighborhood or the lake. 8) Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; The applicant is proposing to remove approximately 300 cubic yards of unstable material and replace with approximately 500 cubic yards of clean,angular soil to stabilize the slope and aid in stormwater management. It is likely adjacent lakeshore properties will not be impacted. The transfer of materials on and off the site will be reviewed and monitored closely by the City's engineer to assure that adjacent properties and the lake are not adversely impacted. 9) Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area or have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses; The proposed use of the property will not be changing as a result of the proposed grading activity so there should be no change in the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties. 10) Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and activities likely to disturb surrounding uses; The finished slope will be vegetated and landscaped; it should blend into the Property. The project,once completed, should not result in undesirable views requiring mitigation. 11) Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise,glare,vibration, odors,fumes, dust,electrical interference,general unsightliness,or other means; This statement is true. FILE#17-3939 15 May 2017 Page 3 of 4 12) Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties,traffic congestion, or unsafe access; the Applicants will be required to keep debris off of the public roadways.The noise resulting from the trucks hauling and equipment moving the material in and around the site should be minimized to the extent possible.The grading project will be monitored by the City Engineer and planning staff so as to minimize nuisances during the project. 13) Designed to take into account the natural,scenic, and historic features of the area and to minimize environmental impact; The project has been designed to take into account the natural,scenic,and historic features of the area and to minimize environmental impact.The long term effect of the project should result in minimal environmental impacts.The project will be monitored by the City to prevent erosion from the site. 14) All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; there should be no lighting or glare resulting from the grading project; and 15) Not detrimental to the public health, public safety,or general welfare.This statement is true. A CUP may be granted subject to such conditions as the Council may prescribe. Additionally, a CUP shall remain in effect as long as the conditions imposed by the City Council are observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the city from enacting or amending official controls to change the status of conditional uses. Septic System Status The property is served by City sewer. Engineer Comments The consulting City engineer has reviewed the submitted information and provided the following comments:The information that has been provided by the applicant indicates that the proposed improvements include more detailed and complex solutions to deal with site drainage and slope stabilization than we had originally anticipated. Since the scope of work now includes infrastructure along with grading and vegetation, it is recommended,that the applicant have the proposed improvements reviewed and approved by a licensed professional engineer to ensure that site specific conditions such as drainage area and soil conditions are adequately considered in the location, sizing, and installation of the proposed infrastructure. Conditional Use Permit Analysis Staff finds the restoration of the slope failure areas to be necessary and the intended finished product is consistent with the City's goals for natural looking shorelines. However,the applicant's plans appear to incorporate some "engineering solutions"which are not designed by an engineer. The City Code in Section 78-1283 regarding Steep Slopes states: Any applicant requesting a permit for construction of sewage treatment systems, roads, driveways, structures or other improvements on steep slopes shall provide adequate information to allow the city to evaluate possible soil erosion impacts and development of visibility from public waters before such permit may be issued. When determined necessary, conditions shall be attached to issued permits to prevent erosion and preserve existing vegetation screening of structures, vehicles and r FILE#17-3939 15 May 2017 Page 4 of 4 other facilities as viewed from the surface of public waters, assuming summer, leaf-on vegetation. Staff seeks verification from a licensed engineer that the proposed solution will effectively stabilize the slope. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation The applicant has shared with staff their difficulties in finding an engineer willing to design a restoration of the failure areas that did not involve completely denuding the slope and making a significant cut into their yard to restore the areas. Staff recommends approval of the CUP. Based the on Code Section 78-1283 and the City engineer's comments staff also recommends the applicant provide a restoration plan designed and certified by a registered engineer. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Existing Survey Exhibit C. Proposed Plans Exhibit D. Hardcover Calculations Exhibit E. Plant List Exhibit F. Site Photos Exhibit G. Aerial Photos Exhibit H. Property Owners List Exhibit I. Plat Map PC Exhibit A City of Orono #17-3939 Conditional Use Permit Application Sheet Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Application# _� 9 O Orono,MN 55356 Date Received: 4-/ c1 -/-7 Main: 952-249600 Staff: //4 C fax: 952249-4616 Fee: $700 pct. C. k j id 9 A ., Mailing Escrow: $700 / NA �'�t� , 14.C.> CrystalP.O. Mtn 55323-0086 Notes: xkSHo1- Please complete. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. SITE LOCATION: c8D 7 i�n9[ 24-) (4, , DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: _I. .♦ • A,`I��4. (: .: -- ad. .onai sheets at necessary) r APPLICANT INFORMATION: ❑check if Applicant address should be used for billing Applicant: 414 � .} ,Phone(Primary): �4— )/ ` a Mailing Address: ,.Q �j 7 /p,/e� �)�1 City:eA }g./ ZIP: , /,--1 , Email: A , Leylt�e� wtc s i e ci, S"aO PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION:)(check here if Properly Owner is same as applicant 0 check here If Property Owner address should be used for billing Name: Phone(Primary): Mailing Address: „.A.(2,3.71,J City ZIP: Email: APPLICANT AND/OR PROPERTY OWNER: • Certify that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant and property owner recognize that they are solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so,the staff has no alternative but to reject it until It Is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of Its potential merit. • The Property Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff,consultants,agents,Commission and Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. • Property Owner and/or Applicant acknowledge they must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or property owner is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend In place of the applicant/owner and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. • Information will be distributed ' em ii. Applicant Signature: 7/7/71_—.____- __,I' Date: - 1 l D Applicant Signature: Date: Property Owner Signature: Date: APR 1 9 2017 Property Owner Signature: Date: CITY OF ORONO CUP Application—January 2017 # 3939 Page 4 Bailey Slope Restoration Our southwest facing slope along the shore of Casco Point on upper Lake Minnetonka has a solid clay base. See attached soil borings. Due to the historic 2014 storm that destroyed many properties dropping 4 inches of rain in 1 hour and 8 inches of rain in total, three areas of our shoreline slope saturated and slid into the lake. After inspection, a large portion of our backyard drains over the slope at three points (Drawing A). Both of which saturated under the weight of the continuous pounding water and gave way. Our slope is 40' tall and stands at less than 1 to 1 slope which is a 40 degree angle (Drawing B). Existing cut stone steps replaced rail tie steps that have existed for over 20 years. The stone steps and steel railing have not moved. All of this is evidence that the existing base structure of the slope is stable. Therefore, our proposal is to structurally compact soil into the slope, replace the topsoil, plant deep rooting species that will rapidly vegetate the surface to increase the safety factor, and produce immediate structural results (Drawing C). Before stabilizing the slope, the upland surface water that sheet drains over the slope will be redirected to (2) catch basins and into 8" SDR35 directly to the base of the slope(Drawing D). This will prevent any additional surface water from impacting the slope. The end result will be a planted native slope that will enhance the environment, prevent erosion, and preserve the natural look of Lake Minnetonka. We feel that an engineered solution, i.e.: clear cutting and stripping back the bank exporting many hundreds of yards of dirt and creating a ski slope look to 138 feet of the shoreline, is not an acceptable option. Revision 5-2-2017 in italics DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY In accordance with Minnesota State Statute 13.04 Rights of Subjects of Data, Subd. 2, "Tennessen warning", we would like to inform you that your request for a permit or license from the City of Orono or any of its departments may require you to furnish certain private or confidential information. You are notified that: 1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. 3. The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permit or license. 4. If your requested permit or license requires Council action to approve, some information may become public. 5. You have certain rights under Minnesota State Statute 13.04(see following page)to review private data on yourself. 6. Your full name is required to process this application or permit. First Middle Last 7 —LSO ? C Asc. a PI Address City IState Zip Phone I understand my rights as stated above. ; Signature RECEIVED APR 1 9 2017 CITY OF ORONO CUP Application-January 2017 Page 14 # 3939 / / • / k N O mM / / D •,-0, Ot / C N U a r, J .0 a X� ,CEJ / o c 8 00 w# N. ..\ .' / of ac, () sF 1` / o t�-0� 0 C/; / / E 2 ca <�� / a ,�ti F •• / �o`� / c � j / 'QC) A & a�P w,• (�,1 \�— • a ‘<i: / coo o s \`\ , "N\ �i •��-^ N ry '.'..'• '�- , o ('1 CO /Wm/ ,, , N lf`l 3', � v E� oc��., sy6 � � o S2 (0 m OZqN 1\\ of o ° k co 9, of \se.° 1 -,/! /!\ N o t .rte 3 ,i '-.1: " F- I ./ Ivii \ �v ct •`c 4- U J A /` o, A \ �u, \3/0� \�_-c v A n 2, k O ^ ���. IMM N U 1 X W 996\ a\ I` e \O I 1 A X i. A ,�, v -O[6— o fq c o V i ti } b� V - a6 ro e " V o p. o; a v96 in ---->„, \ o b�v./ •et, rn X ZV �' " X X �,A o NI ',/ Qec, V 9k �°rs X Gyi \ bo, S. vi N r \ i e,%,<. rn w C x Lu \ n a • X u p • a zy� y� v e + i$ 4''Sj O�Ab�O / CO� 0 o° L c� /�/ . X199 �� v r� ° t�i� v °• /; \ x,h. oe��o A` �y� / �i kil / <, 1 A /� 06 ! ; / $' 4'' a /. • r ftN t \ x y� o o o / o e a v • +� �i,C��o� . ,o X �'j/°� °o` / orb ^ CL �`a /`� p Y cv i$ 3 3 o \. / ° ...� C.,',5,/ sor \ // r Lan La ��{ o° / -•��o o00 0. ��°� .�, // ,�A v�60 X66 / .P. .P., / // /l'�!►!1 �n CAD o \ X// '\ / ✓°00 /.\Qo \^h y6�eV bh 4') 4• ), / �, // ba c° LLJ Ck ) F o ` tix �/ Gy6 \' /0� I'' /, °�99}6 °7�y\ //::„.v:' � mum., m I— CO y� X w /...%' n. ,b / W //J/ / C13 X / y / / O •Immo ,i O, O" �LC� / / LIN. 1 x J a43)% � \ c\ / ,, / / \. / / -O 0,0 mo c_ Q) /J\ X / / / , // r° ,9 y !_ l ro / / / // wq`a�4. j Q CI V N 46 �b�hry / / // ,9,�1,9 yy�, 9 �� .M cl 9A0 //// aG\p. ii NCi /95_�� ,. 1 y y9 3a 29 po !! ci E` a • 1 ,.i 9/ 9 0, 1 .4',-, ...--0.4. eq \ ° a 'e�Ty \.�i i� • v V., aRRi y a �`e,o`� £ 3c is-f,' o `,�C� o �c'i o ° c O • 1 4>: v a,^ o y- N 1 ...z•-.°..>'a c i a�i-Y..)D c6o JD .C'' 4 ZI J y e6� O i y Dy0 •R�`n v � `vo3dya° oi, °, � � mWn° m g U v N ^` o °�\ � �a� o 0.v \' , [ 1.ONS a,S � .V C1 v -cz6 l,T W j Q� O `�/ (j L W W W W W WWW ✓,1 c; .;�„ O` cn Q v, vi vi vi vi vi vi vi vi vi vi N v y U N N .� b h m h ..O h r.1 0, b N C4 (0N °0 .0 O o C W W p q O 1.. N Y N N N c �' O t°N l: C vi o Z i Nj=? SI v vg " v i O �^ Q tY.- c �` CO paaD Y O; c CO a ° *I CC o 0 0 c w .N ,, " J Y Q t s J p 0 c 43 4 cn ° p 11 T.,4b4YYO J N N 2YO ° C L CN w.....k. ,,,, 0, 00oFloV iI 4, Q Q C3 -� to o a Jate, .OO O D 3 0 Y vWi W Q 3 0 W to O vi 0 0. °�' H "O N P. XQZ( 6 _ 8 � � \^ oYY3 o v N� hTi SOC O Q a v, � c m C Q OU 2 2 W `. �.. �' 2 O O c•-• °c C Q, Q o `-' W U U et a 4 Y Q Ct Q °O ° c a 0 p � R � k Q o � � w Wo = ct ^u 0 3 (i >, 2 Q W d O W o. 0 v, v) 0 0. K4.1 U O O.O % u ut 00` ...• L Q 9L40-91 'out'watg+p7span 9e766u/eu3 •1-17-o, :6160 Z900p9aaua0r7 •9wPala7d '0.3'd IOZ=a6 '1'1'8 91.-14-01. MO3Pled S31Vr00SS Wst-ze9(t9[) d .191,•40640 :a/6�S geuncap :6160 217 P66H6a [ur tai(tg[J 61669 MY ins 011 •out `eneiC �eui� ~ p ip 1 fr H )lJVd egp0rp asuaor7.(4 papilla pug lea ru7616M�6Pt67 o[6e07SPoo7a6u6017 'O OSaf/f!r if uno uidauua ad(dltol(tp7lra/4tpWl/ selol7ap o ' ""11r1a41Pu67 1edfis JNIddS '*Z1 puo fzl slo7 uo'fan/ns ""a'•s°t`po"eae°"u"" 'Guxpw"oowAgqu6d°'d`Mpoda7 7l d0/6od0 puo 1(611/n O a D0 I Ia p7a101 p/afan4olu[1011 mow* • :,,8 pasenboo_o'uyd%,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,xkw,r 4 1 S/ 1 rl.I ����` \ \ \ `\\'OT° \. \ rrl 707 M evil imawaVa°os 647 pue at 707 40 a to ways psaaV7po/t W7 to \ a4°`\ \ ugruapa Apavaa41nos ow 1199.4769 say imp awl I0 wogs poo uncap ppb \.\-....e,‘,....07,..' \\�. °`` \\\\\:\ \ . i \` - 'na'4aa Il pool Io pay 407 Io pa enuMy wogs•407 a7OSM/0 pod logy N. \Ma'>rjr ` \ \\,\ _ i4 0571 \g `°`\ \ \ pump r$\,°'y.°= \\ \ N. \ \ 20�a s aw 01 sbaaaao'wa+atuVI sgaooa waauaw„avd Walla 1,61 Puo ree O Q7 +yy.; � 6e, PC Exhibit C #17-3939 FINAL G1=tAC. . INC_ The Building Materials: • Excavate the silt and mud. Export off site. • Import topsoil (structural) blended and screened with no rocks or sticks. • The three washout areas are 35 x 40. • The geostructural product will be staked deep. See brochure on product. • 7:30 AM start time and 6:00 PM end time in the evening. No weekend work. • Start as soon as possible to gain the growing season for plant root structure. • We will practice minimal traffic impediment as we drop off and pick up equipment. There is room to load trucks at the driveway. • The site is quite private. Normal Skid Steer noise. All new tier 4 equipment deletes any smoke smell. RECEIVED APR 19 2017 CITY OF ORONO 3441 Bluff Drive • Jordan, MN 55352 3939 952-492-5100 • Fax 952-492-5101 , 1 _1_1_1 ' RECEIVED r -.., �4 ``-**/6,2,P14 P9 2017 1 VP y 11111111111' , s . ei. ' ... ire .ar , 4 .. a + 1 . i - .-. ........ .- --„, ..4... :, . , ,,- fi- - -..--- .., \ ' ..",...; *, 111( IP 4 .. - r. °"`" .a int'..F* i t t , '1* / f `/ # fi wtµ ( _ f�Y ' µ � «r • 'e ' • ' 1• .,,, t t * , I II!".114 6.8 414,, .,ti I • M" IF 3 .. ,L!4 0 t.14 i Mt Io `* N e A _____. i 1_ 1.‘ i I i_i_i - I 1 r 1 1- 1 1— ]_—,1 1 7.1_1__ 1 ,- 1—�. 1~ �'-- 1 I zo 7 i c4,i. ! i' 7-1 11,' ''': i 1 1 , , , ,t ___ _ 1 1 1 , dty or ticf-- 1_I , 1 1 r ± ; ----1:1-__.---___7: � , ! 1 i -1 L_1 ( _I I_ __: _________H________13 _ _ _.-� --- I._____L_ ; '.! : ,:1:, I -I _ �I ► lid - a I _ - i 1 - - i ,--� e � — _;_— -- ___ _ - i_1_-1—_ 1 I_ (-11 , I_ I — _— I 1 �_ i 1 I I I _( -�_ _ I_� I — 1_ I I-; ',!ti, J_ i1 - 1I _1 1 _I_ r- 1_ -; T . 1_ 11 i 1 1 µh 1- 1a —I —1—i —1_ 1 -1 _ .l-._1-,- -I— L - ! Ili I _1J -H-+THT -+-1HI -H- HI- -1 1 1 , _1-_1_ JHHL 1-i 1 1 -i-i i ! 14; , ._.; 'H 1-___! �_ 1�!. i__ I_��,i ! 1 .�._ 1 , I J-1_1_1_1 A(_,_ _i-1-- 1 _ ; 1 1 1 - vi :..-1 ,i- r -, - 1_; H . 1 _ 1 1 i‘i it 1 -1-1---1--0 -I- 1--f .--.0-- --1 ' I I-- ' . \:1.-- , I 1 1 1 1 ' -\ ; I . ''' "�'i ( I I N.. _AllaLI I i_ �_..a C. Ick.--I..,,�,..r I _till-- 1 ' — -- i- _1 ,1'.x. -- ' I iiiiIi Jill .. ii...- --t1 -- __Illi 1 ii_______ . )....o.i,. 'A ___!__ _______ i --G..,— , I i t`4 I 1 1 I _0_1_1_ I I I0,-,. r__ _1 _1_ _i___,_ _.: 1_____I. ;,_. _ - —I.- - -, 1 1 ( 1 I , 1___Li'm I - I_ - -I n' _ 1 I ! 1 _l_ .,'''-',. :___J__ _I___ ___ 1__;41 111.___j_ 1- — _I ___ - _ q -.--- 1__.-1_111 1 — -1—I-------I--- !_ 11_1. 1. _ — _ -1� 1� 1- t ___ �_-1_ LI 1 + *Hi1_ I . 1 LI 1 i t'vii il _I 1 _1 11I 1 R El i ili? of ' f 1 ! , • I I OtI) It'1/4')I 1! 1 I lin t I I ,i1 , 1,•rrit or 117 1 MN 'i I , 1- _ ..,,,,, 1 1 _ -_-_-_, _i___1_ 1 ;- 1 1 e.- _... _ __ . ____ i,.._ _ ..., :,e_. [7 .- 1 • ! L. ! • '— Ii i 141 LI . I : -IT: --- -- --i - Fir, 1- - --- --- --•I- .1- . I__ 1.../ ry._! t. 11 N,1 ,_! „. i,-,, or.,,,,L,,L. 1----1-1— , ..' ---1. .#1 I V) - . :-.• , JI lLI ..-..!...7-fif-,-1-1,_.,_4.--; - 1_174 . 7.e.. . . II Pi L.: .,_1 i , I , I . .t,, [ ,„.....-,:,1:. 7... _ii__ _ _r1 .,1 1 1 i 1 4_ : [••,2--,..,vi--_,! ' i . 1 i I L---- . _. -4._ 1 1 I ! ''-i-\\ i —i 1 , :-Is-: -1,_-_,,..i‘j. 1 ( I Li 1 1 1 ! ; \-i 1 i Q 1 i -, ... , ! . . 1 • 1 1 I in 1 L---4:b71 y . . i.‘__ _ lc- 1 I ) —T —).— [—10 •1 a , .i ...., .,. . 7 E. 1 .-')I j) . 1 PVT7431, L,ii LI , _ 1 i , _ 1.• it ' _....._ • ,,,, .__! _11 I _. . ( ;(3!,IF 1'Ytri- I__ )1 I,•''.".-1-- -- -- --1---1--'" --1- .-.-- •-• -4.. —1.---- 1, /3 ,....1- , . ' ;.. 1 1 , ' ,- ri---,): .____ ___ _ _ _ .. .... .____. 1 i.I 1 •• 1----1 1 1 It) 1 I ---1 I •-• '!. i II ! 7--7 I el -1-• ,..) 1 i'-i (1 76, 1 i 1 ----7i, _._ ___ 0.,...., : _ _ ! . 1, i______I____I 1- . 1 *•'.-' - I _ 1II_ fiIJiIJLII -i 1 1 1 , ,..• t , 4,„7--,..------,-- , _ . . —-f-Lit 1 I EL 1 ---- -, 1.-..4--,,.-i- - - ----i-- - i- -I 1 :,,L,, _ 1 .. -1 - 1.'-71---- ___. L I I- .4 1 i 14 1 l '›__L 17.„,t.,_ 1 11:-.. -11-4t ,,-,::___„.„ ----- 1leIt — 1 1 1 1 l • I : j Filtrexx Bank Stabilization Solutions, Reliable Stabilization Systems with Filtrexx Techn... Page 6 of 6 livingwaltsOfiltrexx.com(mailto:livingwalts©filtrexx.com)(mailto:MAILTO:livingwalls( filtrexx.com) FILTREXX.COM(http://www.fittrexx.com) ABOUT(htto://www.filtrexx.com/en/aboutl APPLICATIONS(htto:/Jwww.filtrexx,com/en/aoolicationsl INDUSTRIES(htto:JJwww.filtrexx.com/en/industries) PRODUCTS (htto://www.filtrexx.com/en/oroducts) TECHNOLOGY(http://www.filtrexx.com/en/technolo$yl RESOURCES (htto://www,filtrexx,com/en/resources) LEGAL(http://www.filtrexx.com/en/legall SITEMAP(htto://www,filtrexx.com/en/sitemapl X SEEDED FILTRFXX® GROSOXX1'(8"-12" TYP.) OR LIVE PLANTED (SEE NOTE 5) LIVE WILLOW STAKES OR OTHER PLANT MATERIAL FROM SEED OR FROM LIVE PLUGS ORANGE WITNESS BARRIER OVERLYING WA.," ofty , FLW 20 GEOGRID WRAPPED AROUND FILTREXX+111 GROSOXXT" FASCIA OR OTHER STRENGTH 1 �_ (FLW 35 OR FLW 55) ;401:1191. MHW..._ _... FACE BATTER (MAX 2:1) �' ►. MLW RIPRAP/BOULDERS . EXISTING GRADE CREEK BED EXCAVATE BELOW FILTREXX BANK TOE ROCKSOXX EXPECTED SCOUR LINE (LOOSE STONE WRAPPED IN FABRIC) NOTES 1. ALL MATERIAL TO MEET FILTREXX•SPECIFICATIONS. 2. GROSOXX"FILL TO MEET APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS. 3, ALL GROSOXX"TO BE SEEDED PER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT'S SPEC6lCATIONS. 4. BACKFILL TO BE PLACED PER ENGINEER'S REQUIREMENTS. 5. GEOGRiD STRENGTH, LENGTH AND VERTICAL SPACING TO BE DETERMINED BY ENGINEER. GEOGRID — NO STRANDS ARE TO BE CUT DURING PLANTING. ETC. WE RECOMMEND BI—DIRECTIONAL STRENGTH FOR CONSTRUCTION EASE. 6. NATIVE AND DRAINAGE BACKFILL TO BE SEPARATED BY NON—WOVEN FILTER FABRIC. 7. MAXIMUM HEIGHT RECOMMENDED: TEN FEET EXPOSED HEIGHT. B. FILTREXX•GROSOXX`s DEPENDS ON APPLICATION (SIZE DEPENDENT ON PROJECT) 9. WITNESS BARRIER SHOULD BE OPEN MESH GRID TO PERMIT PLANTING. •1 ' j 1����, These graphic representations are intended for SCALE: I T to be preliminary design purposes only«,d ore not NONE FILTREXX EDOESAYER STREAM to be used for egi construction pr fessio without the BARIC STABILIZATION SYSTEM .u.r.�..■..,.c.,o.a•�■. signature o/ a registered professional engineer. Filtrexx Bank Stabilization System A http://www.filtrexx.com/en/applications/stabilization/bank-stabilization 5/10/2017 PC Exhibit D City of Orono #17-3939 ;!0n�o, Hardcover Calculation Worksheet . �.� �` Property Address: t �e a' e).67-16)6!"//)--)7-:) ()est/et) � Prepared b . Date: Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Tier I Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Step I:EXISTING HARDCOVER In the following table identify all items of existing hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to Certificate of Survey(survey must accompany this form). Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict existing hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter within the 75'setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion. Key to Hardcover Item(Describe) Total Survey Length x width (Square Feet) . . ' ( X • . . (7 O.SzF:? - A S.F. B C S.F. D 'i:121� . S.F. E S.F. F >42d_ , i S.F. G "� / � S.F. H S.F. I S.F. 51e_AG1i b�-a ,/,,g6---7- S.F. K S.F. L ...,, ,,0_,I 3 11/43)(48.6..., /e)n--- S.F. N S.F. o . ch S.F. P , tr S.F. Q /f !a 1S.F. . R ,� ,�� (' ')6 _,dL�I �� ,� S.F. - S �' d�Y/J / S.F. r� ,� .• S.F. 111 U dm Cv >28-, 'f t/ _ S.F. �lA S.F. - S.F.- G�� S.F. w X S.F. Y S.F. Z S.F. S.F. (1) Total Existing Hardcover S.F. bit b e Hardqcra Me Y.�►o 7-16043:.' S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. (2) Total Excludable Hardcover _ S.F. (3) Net Existing Hardcover [Subtract line(2)from Nne(1)] S.F. I. S.F. (4) Total Lot Area _ S.F. Existing Hardcover Percentage [(3)+(4)] 117 , ,y J % (Proposed Hardcover next page) RECEIVED APR 1Q ?-Q17 # 3939 CUP Application-January 2017 Page 11 CITY OF ORONO PC Katherine Marxen Exhibit E #17-3939 From: Ron Anderson Sent Tuesday,April 18,2017 4:29 PM To: Katherine Mancen Subject Fwd: Bailey- Plantings Sent from my Verizon,Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message --- From: Ellie Dahl<ellie@a,norlings.net> Date: 4/18/17 3:24 PM(GMT-06:00) To: Ron Anderson<randerson@finalgrade.com> Subject: Bailey-Plantings Ron, I have reviewed the documents that were sent over to us and spoke with George about some plant options we would suggest for the slope. Below are a few I'd suggest: Red-Osier Dogwood(shrub)-cornus stolonifera Ninebark(shrub)-physocarpus capitatus Snowberry(shrub)-sympthoricarpos albus GroLow Sumac(groundcover)-rhus aromatica Crown Vetch(groundcover)-coronilla varia Allium(native wildflower)-allium stellatum Yarrow(native wildflower)-achillea millefolium RECEIVED APR 1 9 2017 Blue Rug Juniper(low growing evergreen) -juniperus horizontalis 'Wiltonii' CITY OF ORONO There a quite a few options available but these are the few I suggest that are easy to get and seem to do well in our area. I tried to give a variety of both shrubs,wildflower,and groundcover that all do well in a very sunny climate. Not only is having a variety nice aesthetically, but it has it's benefits with erosion as well. Having the variety of sizes will do a good job of breaking up/slowing down rainfall as it falls and hits the slope which in turn minimizes erosion during a rainfall event. 1 # 3939 PC Exhibit F #17-3939 ' .14.4.... ... s: gliqr Y. : t_�, II \ ) , 0 ,,4 ,,___ ,.., ,,,, -,It , ,sa Illqr• ;' .' fir, N , O 4 • , c ....--'- •• . . '�, . •;� f kt ' Air L 1 'N� ')••-„, i �..' ,: ,\ ,.. , 1 i •,u, `ytr� M1 �� t s_ t kh � ' • 1 `'i r } 2‘1 i.. 1 ':` a \ . 'a \,, / '\, art , a . y 4. Ir t . .r • int • r' « t.g !ti Best of luck in the meeting tomorrow and let me know if there is anything else you need. We look forward to hearing from you! Thanks! Elk Dab! 1 GaNWAR DESIGNER NNORMSf Le�r ith:iilr,w"IxtiN s,is e. ik �; ;l'A rS E ir- al ;1,102.. :1 `_ fry AI)i" RECEIVED APR 1 9 2017 2 CITY of ORONO # 3939 r, . .C. \ . ,k, ,., ,, ,., ...,_. 4. .V.:,5,.4c.,„ -. ‘..t..s..0.„, J, ' . C\d '.*:* ilios > 0- a'• +rte,., X:. A ,.; " 1 7 heti. "I ` 4C14\0u•1 .... i . \,' - . m'• t .N. \a • It 7 ,,•4:1 ,t'..":6'0;,.i.'-,1...4:1... :8 ,,)_ ..i..1. ,,,(,,, , ,, • '.,f....i....,-----A 4,..-",‘,. -, --,i,s';?,,,, .\111 "......: - - .•''''zf'-'s-721:7-`'''?>'''' s - 5.,.Nkt..- ' i) ;-,. ,,.„ l*_. -,, - `. ,4 ,,,,, .v., ? ,.,:,..0.., r ,._,, , . :. .11,,, . z,rs;:',‘,,,1 ''.-4.r' 't,,,,4,-; ', '''''"-.0"'" it ii, A , , , , , ;...,,7,...,..., • .q..• .." Alli lik 1111 , _,.. 4._ , , ......... ....•v• PI . f -imr.• Ilia ti rr r • •fir+74. • 1 ,,,,"./ r 1• f. 0041/4 1 � � .► • r 4, •�' ' \• , A lir . 4c G . dlot t'r., s ` ` ter, # u - - ....ip , ,: ti, ,,,,4r-1,,..- -.. r . ' ' mizir- I# tp {\, 1 ` "iL $� 4 t {� 1 r .,• `x it is -,;: ;,, ;s, ,, ., . ;,..,.. 4., ; s ... . . . i. f .. 4 7� it 7 1 "•'t f J t1.aim ,f ^ ' . `i.fi..r "x,.. - .,. s ' yx t -tit'> G tis , ..,y},-./ ,t t ',.i w f a ti *•� ` �} ' „ .Yti ^r i ef P• A' ., . ,..., ,- ...., - ., , ... . .. fc. , i '4.- .- , , -I.--; i . 7,1,-,, . -, , .4,- . ., . . - . , . . .- ,,. e tie `, . ,.. .. � r: C� ._r. . ,.,. y , .. -., . • ,.. ,•;., t ; • c as .• . - ?'...'4.....', .• ' j jrr ' c11ict. rrjA4Z p t R 'tiy ‘y' • z`a f'. s ` i.'-'.. f IS'�'y r t E" . - a} .4 ` 5 ;`., t. M.+'5:3A '4...4--1,, A.,.. .,*. 7 4,i , �F s ar '/• lit1, a • iei ...:3_ a �: a y r. t 2f 7 t _ - it S• 1 ep �F \ • r�F - _ 5 y" s F " .... yip,'•• � 1 r �ti, ` N ,V.,„4,,,,,..4.\414:_a:n.‘.L'' ,- .„,4,,..4,,.,L,-„,,„444' ."\ ,,..t,.'.„.-„,,-...,„. .,„.,.1.,.'.„',..c.,..t,.f,,,!,.,t„t...,.........:._i.:_,_.•,, „, ,4il.‘,.i.x,..... ,,,,. -'',;-'''•L--,'''0,•••..:',':•____f_''- i .., 1: 3 ,,,... : , • . , „:„..,...„,,,,,.....,..ti,--- _”„• 7,...-.-- •,A-''• .... . w:. ' - 'ea .....,it , ....., -,.-.....•.:1•:.i,..... 6.,.-..i;t••••:'-., ,..K. * ., A,....-'3 4,:i. 0.....„,„,6 , ,. I: . . , „„fit _ ,. :_ :„.., -,t. ..:_.-,.. ,, ._,,,,i-.. ,.:,:,..x., . ,,,t. ft .0 ,-- 0 • rt4. • s 1,4 t ..$ter. `;...1.�5. ,,;•,,;:,i';':, .,,..',...;•1•':'_!;, _27-•,..i -4:, • 41*. 1 *{tw 4�f rill. y,i.itsf T t k ` „'„,„,„:;00.2,„,%,„4.4:-.:, t it„piS tti,. 9*1 La '.4., .Y s Y. 1; k ` r ;, � r ' `'q , * . ; .^r re" r k 2 eye ' ; ,r r_`_xr. y tx +ri 1l•. *fir• -' .. • mai•,.j.1 �j.: . , t4`. ... ,, . s 1 3�. 4'fit,' , '� l { 'Ys ` , f , )0:•„.* ' . '•e, 4 j. "4 ..' • ' k f t �.. J.•i, •i1 y r • 1ft t• • • • �...: \ / i''' y ` i (• ! i r ', • ols .* 4 ,, , , .. , , , ,, -„, . .,. . , :15,%:' 4i.. ),. .- ;;.1,4. 4 -- , . 4. i r . k..4 ' .1_ ,jejf.. ,. • i y .' .11,, ":4A . . 1pfr .rt''.1.,,,..1. j ...:L /.11:4:`, i' -.it fir`' a. s ' '. . 4 ♦.�' `'� 'Sw '�''4- / � I r •• �, ,1r�� � �. ` ,s •:fir..i/' ,";...,t � �: i.t •4{ `. " e ►' LA ' i fit. ' •, i7fl !' .,- 1 R n:i4' !.:1,-- d t '�'h .:..,:z* w •`i. 1 .> ,•!•�} �` . i t ?�•• �.' ` .�'! ►" •k :� 1•, `►� y ti .�+;w � '' til /r r`r I -5,1,, , . � i. +_•,,•',,,";- .., . I. S . . ,;-.....", 'f .- ••-.4_. • _ - ,..., „ . ••, ,..- , , . • ::._ ..,..,..1/4 -- , - _ __ _ - .:,• i"., -lrfu.:ifirti + -7- /--•,-• - • A"pp,.ol .4 • ., ':-:..1." " : / ..,• • -- Of T ' ,.. , / ..k .A ." " -Y `4". ' . 5,,,..., ..,7-- • ,, ___:,,, . ''. .i.,-...-- -- . / ---- ...0 ./- )4' , • .." .. ; ••• , ..., •.• , ' .,. ••••• or ` ' .-.,.4,..,,,.1111 ••" t --• , i .- , 1, , ' • i . ... . l' , 241 ,4,... . i'.• .."` , • , 0* ' t•-• A li - ' 't " / l. ,_.41, • r • • 4 ,, t„..,..,. . ,,,,i . iL• -d. ., lity.,_ - ,., ,..,, . 0 , I , 1 -• ,- •:• • •1 '""' /..",. , . .,..r.,.„,.... , ., ), i ' • • ' k • • ••'',. 4 . * ty : '• ,4c' 1,t1 ,1,p, _.... , 44 \ _ . :;. '••• . . -.':* , ,., , , ,,,, • • ' ii • . .. 41: • . 7 ' .,.. 1 i. . • ••,•t• ) ' ' 1 ....1.00ti 41t i • .,• ,, • .A • il1 ,, 4,r 4 i ...., '41 . . k)',.•) ; . • ' 1 i 4 • 1,4,4 , , , .14. .', •4.,. ' ',1• 74' • , .. •; •..,71/4,'. . 1, 1 1 ') ., • 4/ tit SAO' -'. -. : '', '4 • i • I, • . • .t 4 7 . ii iv 0 •.1,A4 4f 4,..4.r. . — •' or , • 1.... 4.1 gor ,C . i o ,• - • ,, 0 ii ,,i, ' . 42, to . . •,' "411 1 . *- •- • ' ''' c " .:". • Y. II - 19 t. , • • , 1, r . - . .. . N. , ' 0 ,;.1,. °* : • ' . 4 . 0 •'. tt. 1 r4 it • '. •V , lit( . , .__„,_ Iv' 4i, . pi, 'Ply-, :, 4, ' • ,„...). . t. 4' • 4: 4 . •;),‘,,, . •--4 ,t's. 7-Clf:tit' . , 4 i. .4. • • ' k ,61IP - t i. ,_ ,•,/ ....., — ' . ..— . _.. • . . s „it ' • I . 44,„ .., . IF • i' ...--t1 . .... . , ofs.,. ik. . - •. 14‘.,-•••• Nti• • -, t - 101. 1 '1,,,, v • /:, -- -'41 '•'f* i ' :It Ale. „,-- . yy Cy , IV i:.,-; 1.40, ;,'..'t.• • .i.:T • ' . . ti' qt.( . 1 •,,.'• , 1107 • :' . • .. 4 6 • . 't _ ! •• . , , Al • . i,a.• ' • . 4 I, ,*ii, , *N. le 40. ,• •%, /•••;•• , .. t t,A E,.•7•' - ,, ..., ... 0 V• llt- l'N'Ill ' 717111/1"-'\•- r, -'' 'Pr Arf• #• 41. :141 t •. + •1,1 . ' riV: • '' . t. ON.... I 7 •• i• ' , ' • dr' .., - , , ..... r th ------- . --. 41FEIIr .. 411.\,,• ' ., ,...— iee4 ... 14014,9***. ' yit'oi:;000 414 f -i ... ,- • e . ,- • lifr 40i _ ‘,.. 2 N., ,., 4.. ._•.„,ff74b. . .... ..... ,.. ,. . . , . 4, :1-;• 4Nitoft: _-011r„,...:...,-11 ry..... \ ,. •c. - „„..._ -.\-- •- 1• A,' WWI*. AI -- fi':' ' .... '.11WiJ - .., ..,. • —• ... • :,..00"k—A - --.,,....1 -" r-•,,of .- ' . ..,,,...4.- • . ..,.. ../E • !' 4 1014 6. - * ''''' ... --,ill' .Y. d•. ,...04-- „„.,.•.,','- , jr __•.;_•._../- ..4-111P ' _,„1,' •.., ,.4..,,, "..••54 '.•i". 01.7.'-*: 2•/'-,..4 ..- . r A 1:i1.1:','.' '4'- IL. . : .''' . l.,' ,,e," a', t # • ., eion ...P ......---.........,.....•--- -di"' • I# .6. ...- , ik. ' ;'`4:' domill.M.11101111er,_ • '.- ' ' 'I"• ; •' ...4t1 ,. °, . •#.7'EA' .." % • ' ...# ... .....• .-•••••:4WpordA P0.- . 101P'''. •SiNeirr. 4, ig A •, '• •*ow 4.i ' d .*4.. . "%re, - . -d' ?' . ' — • 7 41,11,, _ _ .. . I 'T ...... . 1:'- ,4, , ,,,,,,.,:., ,,, •--,,s• ,- .i.f. ''.- ai-,,I,',...1",• .‘ , ', -L,.if 4,16{ ,I 481 111111°8` -ib°.'s, 7/.1.- 4 ' 4, • •41 . - Allelk. 4.- "410, " . ....• aer 1 4 .. a 4 H ,. re ,-..,:, ,4 , , A , , ifs Air' -° 1 • i I - .*,. (- . ',i 1 1 ij, • ,,..,,gillf , I le %.,\,i,, '..•:',.' ' ', •' ° , 1, * V.. 1 '.. ' . , - ( ..• .ilr I,, ''..: .-. , , — V i • ,.,.,,e-: • •••1 '. T'(• ' • -, • ,.., .. N• ,,,, 4,,: • , , ---- ...e• \ r' t,. . , , , 1,.-.1 , _ .! . • ..... i•*•-- 14 , - 0.. 11f, t7:1111:A.Ai lilk k . . . I' ' 3.,.;_ • , ,,.. y 4 .•"4. i "......41 , . ',/c.- F 1 I r ' i: ''' i'''4 ''4 ' '' •• ' 4"''' i: ,,, %4, 1 ‘. • '' 4 --•1 ""e.' •` ' . Jill&A • 40- 0°0 Ar,t, , ,.. - . 4e. , „.----- _ , . ,... -.t. • . 0 ' . ' .Ve" T---- .. i k 1 • , •7-ste - ' ,,, - -4 4 • r,", • • .4" 6. / , ••• j•• \ I i •14h. L / ' ' . 1 fri• SS . • / ••.' ''11' ,11E r/ //0 ''''. ''L ' 4L 0' :,-441111111' 7/; 'lie , '// ' el.'- .wit, .i r.r.o 9 - ' .4'. t ' ' 1., itj. r ,. ,,,,,-1:. ‘),.. .,,,.-41 14 I + ,.Ast,,,j., ,,, N, , t•Nt‘r . M ' 4CS y' I t y/ � ' 5ir'; Aii4 4 pi '�� ! { th , •46\ it fjl ` , � ,tib. 1'' '11 /No's' * - 1 :., '.0" 'n ''',',1 741P 1;,,,,, ''.")". i �.- `�+ `'� 'ry4 eft � .f ,� ' ` ' °( �� 1. k, • '. . • r' r A� `. ,� ° •- •'�- t . fit- � r�.s1 � #., 4 ' 1 /. s. I / i• to�•` 41 i • 14'.j K "'`,1`, 1 . -,,f.N. i. t; ' '` k , .• Ai t\ ' ,� !V -4,—:a .., ~.zr .1'i ? +‘ A\t y•( '' ,_,t d'!' ` % . `�i.' r-tC a, f ',� "1:A �Ij .�`i 'w.b •f • h4.� 3• Lt Fr r � ., -, • ,14 iiit. -'1 i',�; r i► , '' 1$,} .-q'ts f'�frt`' ice' ti.4 c i y a �� -g.:. ...,-.• +S i t� I*' • • tie • �` fit' V f. `Y li ` { / ' \ 1\--- k/.., • p , ... , .,., )e, / , ,„:, ,c,.14. -,a„i' e •iii,; ', . A l' , %if .� :ice- '' ' Y \ , r . .44 1:i j i i . x .11 �A/ ` rC r. . I ,fI` • ' I ^��. . I i` •' •' • . . ...%mss! iI`+J , w 1 PC ? =, ,-' y ,� Exhibit G ' f A,. *;.` s Y;,' #17-3939 l FJj 44k *fr,� ; k.j Illte4efAite V4.1. bh • 44. � 'r / .'4' . t 1� -* ,! ,fi '.":77-4111( ;131:7'... ' ' '' ' . 146k. . t • Y - • -f. ., .. It • - _ ..lit ''' f ♦ `� - ' rte` * rS.¥ 0.;1!ter q •.,.. I" `' '•'t1•1 .... •• , t s 14,6 { _ � ` ' + x N • , : `ted tj 1 ,, : ta-_i ...♦ .—.. i yqF t�.+ 'ly. e{ .. • XF F" {iz •• +* * sMaar ¢ �,�Cr 11; " tv x�+ Aug.-r' _a k f � , 1,-.0 ,t* 3 `Ff ,1 t: .I 'A . . ;It,- ! * "'� i,IS, f." '3, "U .a" �' • ,� ..5. •` ;� •'� '�'L `` 'd' ""'S _k. ` `` 's... y ,ny ` j f ', `.' -,..' ,, N,3' 3, '''''4‘ - ' . 9 —..,, .N, „'fit +• R v•is Lu r. r 4441, $ • •M. Z ` `YAC ova 'I. rlo .y::'-'„,...1.-,,- r + ...WY.n <° tir !. { ''',...A.. r a , h «,. /� • e _ Asa s•`►. •",:-..A••74,•!:--:: fir.,.. �� dF.^ '4c"'!' • /" - ,p,a ...# __ °J�� � ' <. a y r � '�j a"':..�_ 't �5 fi4'y6„ 3,7' M�' d IIS �y�y"� "��•��ti � - .h.,..� - ... v , r.= ' - / ,�a .�- ./'*"' til L � a cc , `.. � :, .. sang 4 , '� A...- ti .�, a '�.,, ..Air' ,t,„. . 1.► �ir , _ • '1.1..:4,11!'.1"'"' .;• •. V$ � t - ti x •� c +-, "C/;....r. f v. • Cr ot < r 1't,µ �, f .-w X11,•'amu W...."ww r = -,,c---... eT -bt r '144 �. ,:..:J 7., •.1 ''' &,'�4?. , ,,��. i "t"'#:,..'-c-7-11.„:".«M, dh ';,,r �' ' .40 41 �, kf �4-- ; z, . "�' '' ` ,, .r Y- __• Y - +t*'t. ` .;�' 'Y'-41 .,' :v� ,1s 'r:a#. * _`.. r «sir. �r 4-5 e ! .1 _ ."i,w a i = \- - lx f� jf1 II ' +�. ds«4.1..5;� ► F '-'*-44:.''. �• q # ,' c - • • • ,, "_-. `' :as }- , RRA, •_ 7tl 0,. 2015 . . ,. la 0,344, ::: 4,,,,,4.,' ''''.„Alk ,A ' 41r.' * '' ; •`• ' ' .",, , ,..,, -. ;,...,,,:. , ...'. '•/',-.,'-' yi ... ,...4.,t ' . .--1,..,,,..0i4:77r i to, - - ,, `‘.4 ->../7..;" H.7 ' -°'.7''' ','-' !rr',/;' •''', .1 '•-*:,1. ,,I : - ;iili .,'" --7"-4..11 :','At t.„'1',''''.•- --a --'!•'‘'' --,„•••-, ''''''..4,,,7,,r,,4,,,•lhirW+•:•-,„-1 '. -*,.44 till, 4 ,,, ,' ': ,'':,' i -''--z .' '',..- I. :If 4 '' 4' - ' -. .41r• , -l'..•''',i7 0..,ti7i4::'T .6,•:, -.:4'‘ H: '' '' ' ' ,''''. :1;';•11 ''' t-; , .41 7 # ',„,',,,,,i••..'--4 •, •I''' '' 4 ' `;' '-'\' t, . -.-,,-.:/ ./ ' ,-; ''-,0-1..;.•-,--- .•'•1.;.4.-/-:-,‘./..:-:--,',' ,' .,V .,, W7 d',"''''at'''' .:, ' -1141' ' i ''''$";* "s",filf;Agetk iik *er.,..,,i,(At•,-.1.;;,;4, - '''' 4;'.. . ' - ' . '- • -- . ,;'•;•,;... .•; ti, • ;-, Tr, ' ,r.'.., . • - •7 t .-/A 7 .4.. • ' . , ,,,'• KA,,,‘,,, i,;,t4;4,, .-..-334,tfr ..,ea.!'7, . ?;,4.•; / ,' , , ,,, ,,: .., 44 .,,; , ,' I:, '''' ,•., . .' ,' ,,,Z,t :::,t' :,-! k. - ..1,:.2A--- ---,;„/ ' 1 ...,.,-----'''' •-,` ', ''' , ,L'‘ . ' , - I ''. ,ip,% , ,•-, 4. i,,ze:;,... 11 -,,,-, N-,..,/.'4* ...../14. , .'‘ -.i.,V.'., . ;,1:'' . t * i ,•74"., ,.....U0, 0.4.,;,::,1,: / i ,.... ,. - t , "4,' ' , , '' , 4,1! --,,, --4.1' ..1.• - • I .....,•-'1 ''..(1 4„.„ies.' ., , tr''' t' ' / I , v .. ,: ,.. . ,' - ,7it,•,,,-;4, •,...2-kt.4 - - •-,: ,-',',- ' Ifi , .:11 ,: ::71' 'I''! '‘. r i / 1 j .. ... . ,ii .. I 1,,' ,-,(1... 1'71_ 1,t' 'if(' .• .'• '' * ',-"` ; ' l / $ * •••.k. - — . ---.•—„,,, . . - . ,. , :;,,,,,, , A4-...iO4-0,1. , • ---4 . . ,„. , i . fift ,i„ - .., 4 . - ,., .... _. , • , .. .,,....;; I .,44, . p t.r, .i.v,.'ri ,.,,, , '.; 4,!4,-. , .... ' - • ',''', ,fr.'-%...4... -.,'o 1..,%," i',..s.,',.— - --Mt , ,. riti:'!' .11.#' •'- 3 tifir •*: (,t,i:71.‘''''' i,•,1 ,A4V94 ?../te! Ai i , ,ii,,4'1. ::;.,•',...• : ', 1.-:.I,' , , ,I. r , : , ..tc...„ `'4‘,"-..': ' -v It q : if (Pr 1 • tf ,;.-,i ' '11 . it ,„%.,,,,,.. 'kr. '' . ,,,-ti”„ ' ,t, , , '4/:`,1•";-4 -0:10t.,k1 , , 4* ' •.•• ..- "-.; • ../04,,.•,.,1; ;‘, ,\.:.,„;„. • N, , ,,,, — , .„, .4, . - 4 , .f.- ' ir-i.:' 4.'", ..•ttl, ' ' 1 ' -,,. , . , ,, ,:-,'' , )0 ''.'" ' '."..,.4 is . -,1„1.,,, -4,,i,,'.t : -,,,j,& ,,(7 •-.*, f,, ' ,,,,,/,1 ,'4, i t ,,t , I ,k., , I , - . ,-,...;jecer--.. . -,. 1' .', i *i-; 1'4;V:' '.4 : ; 4r0.1'1- 'l'cl4., •'' • [ '4.,-;.,,,,,-%-;;---:: • ,-41 .. i ,,,. ; : , - ,,,k.r...,.. .... , tt„,. . , Or 7' 7 3'. rr,;,- -! .,.' ' !, .k 4.-''' ' ''- A. V ' ;(74.,, lit. ',:!-: `4,- / .., , . F. .,. .* , , _,-,. 4. , A• I i r "/ / - '.4 / / / , .•• , • ,/: ,.4.1/.,-..r', .......,: ''..44 ,t'i, i. / / ,. „-,,, .,. ...,„4,0„, .- •,1 ,,, .: ., ,..' . '''' ' '' I l' .•;,:', ',.,;.' ;,....:1.:, . ; ( .c4 • ., ,i ,'W"3 i."/ J ,.q 4 ji • . ..... r , I V':1 ta ' . .‘ ' '.. '4.V.I. '' ' NIA .1;1.7.7.'W's.'n.' 4 ' •t'4 e . . 4. •,,T,-.• •-•!. ;,,..i.; - ''''. ;. :,-...1. - .”,i",s' ' •'.; ,!L . i , t ,„;,,,,..1...,i......-.,„. ' . ' ,,, al.- , ...,, - - ' --,-iti;,30:',, ..,',. i,,...- ,.,g, ::. ', , •,..,:; , ;,',1e,t.f•"' -, - I. .; ',i.' - '''',-.-2.','-, ,.. . - 4 _ , , ,..„ „„ .._ ,. .:_ ,„..„.. ,,-:. ,,, ..,,,,.7.--Ei i.,.- ,,,,,, .,.... ,„.i%,„:„, ,..• .:,.,-;„ 't. • .;:' .'. .r ‘ Ln, - , . c .-, 'f, '%'.• ,Z4 t.: :7VA' let ',!k- r-..A--'4..-''-'''...,•-t-,:7'-•:,*:; - ''', ,,"' '.;;1), :,ki ' . ...," '- — ,. i.--:.4 4,4 . ,,,,,.,, _ ,, , ..,-7,Iriz..-41.1.04•',.•-eme. , ,,, '4-`1.---k", • ,, to ''' .--' -'4'. ''' ,,t• :7,17-ty,,,''1.,r ,,,,•L. e',,,N -,,,, t-', , -, --.) „---4.‘„ 'l''- _;,',- '-'if• ' „• ••4 ,,-I .., , „,,.,,,,;0,,," , ' i...- 4...t,•• 4-,..,..7 .; - 4,----' '411-1- . ,,''' t,;',01. ' i...,)'•;" l''''' ` ,•.'''''' ' ' ' ; : N. ••• '-'. 44 ' ' t'-:;,'. -,.- , . '4.,i, 4,4' ',....'''.-1."' ' * 44 ..,•-.1-'.': '11k#4'! ' ,447— , '." :...`..---:;' t.t4;;,-;i7 '-''' /47.:' : a ', e or II „ i, • ' :` t/v'',/ .!/..`1','.., .ti...;`, ..: •:..”'. 1-, v‘' ,,- ,.,'' ' ''' ••••- )' ' -' , ,,t,,,-;,1'..l„''," ",.:: ' '''C.,..-•'.;‘,.'•)"';`,‘,;;'-'•„-• .Atli ,,$*:' • ' . , . • ' 'VIC $ !, i) Jio i'-,,,./4''',^'•,, ';'' '`.."1,.•444. .'' - '4*, -1,'./' i'' ,‘...,,,. .'' lit;,,/ ,f c'''.,• . 0 ,*.% 'f-1.414.7"'„,A4/• 4'''''.1 er'-‘4 444'.';,014.0t..''''';''' 'Ytfir ''''';, :. ';',4 itt'' t ''' ''t..'Wal,S6,_t4,''''44';: .i-if ,--'../.ti/X;':.-,":'1',.%i/.,• ,lip,=.;,...,1,.*,'it.° .-, ..'...,.„,_,,,,i.,.... ::-.,kfpc iiiks,, - ,,,,,,,,,..-4, ,..., , :b.„,..:iirr ,,..4'A?' .-4 ..,-':1-,,,,;-',:,t • 4;.,,,•:.,,.. -'''''',;•`.7','' \';'':' i.,,- „...'',,-7.,.... .',,:7," • -'4f`,' ',.' "4Y , ': ' '.!:., ,,r ,;•• 3/ 4; '.• / . .•.- •-' -,• . - •, ; / fi;-.27,•:-..,..--',., - --- -- • 4 'S Ip-' �jiy '.. ,.r = , yet 7r il, 1 ,.' ea, ! 4t • w S� s e ., ,1- ,- t , - v. '4 f + • • ,. ; ,x X ., F • i ,41,4:4 pts. * 4. • " ' 4 > fie. ^ 1 „ " s , i a � r r Air 4 - , - , . , 70 yh il • N •V .• y. µ 4 O Jr - IR•Q i, 1N 40 f. F + • • .. a. RUN DATE:05/02/2017 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) PAGE:1 36 20-117-23 23 0011 38 20-117-23 32 0010 38 20-117.23 32 0020 CITY OF ORONO WESLEY C&BRENDA BYRNE TODD J THEILMANN PC 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 2817 CASCO POINT RD 2799 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 00000 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 Exhibit H CITY OF ORONO WESLEY C&BRENDA BYRNE TODD J THEILMANN #17-3939 P O BOX 66 2817 CASCO POINT RD 2799 CASCO POINT RD CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0012 38 20-117-23 32 0011 38 20-117-23 32 0021 C M COLE&J P COLE K M BOWE&K M BOWE RUSSELL WYLLIE 2776 CASCO POINT RD 2815 CASCO POINT RD 3799 CASCO AVE ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 CAMILLE M&JEFFREY P COLE KURT&KELLE BOWE RUSSELL WYLLIE 2776 CASCO POINT RD 2815 CASCO POINT RD 3799 CASCO AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0016 38 20-117-23 32 0012 JOY ARLENE GRUNDEEN C A PRICE&C D PRICE 2797 CASCO POINT RD 2813 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 JOY A GRUNDEEN CAROL A&CHARLES D PRICE 2797 CASCO PT RD 2813 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0017 38 20-117-23 32 0013 D HURD/J L ZEHRINGER-HURD THERESA A NORSTED REV TRUST 2795 CASCO POINT RD 2811 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 J D HURD/J L ZEHRINGER-HURD THERESA A NORSTED 2795 CASCO POINT RD 2811 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0018 38 20-117-23 32 0014 REED L LARSON J M&P S BAILEY 2773 CASCO POINT RD 2807 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 REED L LARSON JOHN M&PATRICIA S BAILEY 2773 CASCO POINT RD 2807 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-I 17-23 31 0066 38 20-117-23 32 0015 DEAN V GREIMANN ROGER H FROMMELT&WIFE 3779 CASCO AVE 2805 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 DEAN V GREIMANN ROGER H FROMMELT 3779 CASCO AVE 2805 CASCO PT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20.117-23 32 0006 38 20-117-23 32 0016 B L SLOAT&C F SLOAT S M WELTZIN&E H HABERMAN 2824 CASCO POINT RD 2800 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 BRIAN L&CHRISTINE F SLOAT SHANE M WELTZIN 2824 CASCO POINT RD ELIZABETH H HABERMAN WAYZATA MN 55391 2800 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 32 0007 38 20.117-23 32 0017 D J WORMOLD&LORI B WORMOLD TAMMY L WOODIS/MARC BRICKMAN 2829 CASCO POINT RD 2818 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 DAVID.1 WORMOLD TAMMY L WOODIS LORI B WORMOLD MARC BRICKMAN 2829 CASCO POINT RD 2818 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 32 0008 38 20-117-23 32 0018 DAVID.1 YORKS&WIFE R CHESLEY&M CHESLEY RI) 2825 CASCO POINT RD 2794 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 # 3939 DAVID J YORKS RANDALL C CHESLEY 2825 CASCO POINT ROAD MICHELLE E CHESLEY WAYZATA MN 55391 2794 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 38 20-117-23320009 38 20-117.23320019 ��P+��1�✓0�� R E DEMSHAR&M L MARTIN GD&B S CZERWINSKI �✓ 2821 CASCO POINT RD 2801 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 RONALD E DEMSHAR GREGORY D/BETH S CZERWINSKI MAY 0 3 2017 MARGARET L MARTIN 2801 CASCO POINT RD 2821 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 CITY OF ORONO _ Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map PC Provided By: Resident and Real Estate ServicesDate: 5/2i Exhibit I #17-3939 1711 - due; real im I OW in ,Q� t•( `afro .\i' 7 it _./ 4/1r, ,7$ ein Asa Buffer Size: 350 feet 0 60 120 240 ft Map Comments: i i i i 1 i i i J For more information contact: RECEIVEDHennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South Minneapolis,MN 55487 MAY 0 3 2017 gis.info@hennepin.us CITY OF ORONO 3939 Hennepin County has developed electronic forms of certain property information databases.Hennepin County makes reasonable efforts to produce and publish the most current property information available.The viewer should understand,however,that Hennepin County makes no representation or warranties,either express or implied,or as to merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose regarding the accuracy and/or completeness of the information contained herein. 3939 RECEIVED MAY 032017 CrrY OF ORONO Item 09 Date Application Received: 04/19/17 O�T Date Application Considered as Complete:05/03/17 VO 60-Day Review Period Expires: 07/02/17 To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members *kEs ��Doug Reeder, Interim City AdministratorHo�``` From: Melanie Curtis, Planner mcc Date: 15 May 2017 Subject: #17-3940,Jason &Anelise Peterson, 4105 Highwood Road, Variances Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicants are requesting the following in order to construct a new home to be attached to the existing garage: 1. Side yard setback variances for the new home and tiered decks; 2. An average lakeshore setback variance for the new home and tiered decks; 3. A hardcover variance to permit 28% hardcover where 34% exists and 25% is allowed; and 4. A variance from the defined height of 30 feet. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the setback and height variances for the home. Staff recommends denial of the setback variance to permit a 2 foot setback for the deck and the hardcover variance. See Page 6. Background The applicants are purchasing the subject property.They wish to remove the existing home which sits about 43 feet from the lake and construct a new home to be attached to the existing garage(constructed with variances in 1996). The new home is to be 5.2 feet from the west property line (10 feet required)The home will maintain a 10 foot setback from the east property line,and be approximately 77 feet from the lake. A wood deck is proposed to follow the 75 setback line, but will not encroach into this lake yard. The southeast corner of the home will encroach into the average lakeshore setback line approximately 5 feet,the deck in this location will encroach approximately 12 feet. The proposal results in 28% hardcover,a reduction from the existing 34%. Additionally,the new home will be attached to the existing 3 level detached garage,the new home will be 32 feet in defined height where 30 feet is permitted. 1 FILE#17-3940 15 May 2017 Page 2 of 6 LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-330-Setbacks: LR-1B Required Existing Proposed Rear/Street 30' 25'garage 54' house East Side 10' 14.5'garage 10' house West Side 10' 3'garage 5' house 2'3-level deck Lakeshore 75' 43' house 76' house The existing home encroaches entirely lakeward of the Average Lakeshore average lakeshore setback line. The proposed home will have a 12 foot encroachment for the deck, and a 5.3 foot encroachment for the home. Section 78-330-Lot Area/Width: LR-1B Lot Area Lot Width Required 43,560 s.f. (1.0 acres) 140' Actual 8,377 s.f. (0.19 acre) 51' @ OHWL/48' @ 75' SB Section 78-1403-Structural Coverage: The proposed tiered lakeside decks do not have a roof and therefore are not considered structural coverage. Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 8,377 s.f. (0.19 acre) Allowed: 2,000 s.f. * Proposed: 1,684 s.f.** *78-1403(a)(2)On lots of less than 10,000 square feet in area, the total combined footprints of all principal and accessory structures shall not exceed 2,000 square feet. ** 78-1403(b)Calculation of massing. The following shall be included in the calculation of the total combined footprints by structures: (1)All roofed structures where the highest point of the roof is more than six feet above existing ground level. Section 78-1700-Hardcover Calculations: Stormwater Total Area in Allowed Existing Proposed Overlay District Zone Hardcover Hardcover Hardcover Tier Tier 1 8,377 s.f. 2,094 s.f. 2,837 s.f. 2,342 s.f. (25%) (33.9%) (27.9%) Applicable Regulations: Side Setback Variance (Section 78-330) The applicants are proposing to connect the new home to the existing garage.They are offsetting the house to improve the substandard setback set by the garage by approximately 2 feet. A setback variance is needed as the required setback is 10 feet;the proposed setback for FILE#17-3940 15 May 2017 Page 3 of 6 the home is 5 feet. Additionally the three tiered lakeside deck proposed is set back 2 feet from the side lot line where a 10 foot setback is required. Defined Height Variance(Sections 78-1&78-330) The lot slopes from the road to the lake significantly. In the location of the proposed building pad (garage+ house)the slope is 20%.The existing garage measured alone has a defined height of 22 feet;the new home measured alone has a defined height of 30 feet. Because the applicants are proposing to connect the new home to the existing detached garage they must be measured together;the new building height is now defined as 32 feet. The garage height is not proposed to be increased. City Code Section 78-1366 allows for the height of structures on lots with a 25%or greater slope in the location of the building pad to increase by 12 feet in height over the 30 foot limitation.This lot has a 20%slope in the building pad location. Average Lakeshore Setback Variance (Section 78-1279) The existing home to be removed is detached from the garage and is situated entirely within the 75-foot lake setback.The new home will comply with the lake setback requirement but will be slightly lakeward of the average lakeshore setback.The home will encroach 5.3 feet lakeward of the average lakeshore setback line;the attached multitier decks will encroach as much as 12 feet lakeward of the average lakeshore setback. Hardcover Variance (Section 78-1700) The applicants' proposal results in a reduction from existing hardcover—both in the 0-75-foot zone and for the property overall. However,they are requesting a variance to permit approximately 28% hardcover. They have provided some solutions for stormwater mitigation to offset the requested variance (see Exhibit G). Governing Regulation:Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health,safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn.Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.537 Subd. 6(2)variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The proposed new home is residential in nature. Due to the separation distance between the adjacent homes,there is adequate space for light, air and open space between the FILE#17-3940 15 May 2017 Page 4 of 6 addition and the neighboring homes. The lake setback of the proposed home is an improvement over the existing.The variance is in harmony with the Ordinance. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.The setback variances allowing construction of a single family residence in a residential zone are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as well as the character of the neighborhood. The variance to permit a hardcover level exceeding the 25% allowance is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan's lake protection philosophy. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The request to permit construction of a new home with a tiered deck,within the 10 foot side setback appears to be reasonable as the adjacent properties do not appear to be adversely impacted;the mature vegetation and topography separate the Property from adjacent neighbors.The height of the new portion of the home will be lower than the existing garage to which it is being connected. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The height of the existing garage,the slope,the shape and size of the property were not the result of actions by the applicants.The nearest structures on the neighboring properties are offset and set back sufficiently to allow for light,air, and open space between each of the homes;and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The setbacks or defined height of the proposed new home will not alter the character of the neighborhood. The setback of the proposed tiered decks should be adjusted to meet the 5-foot setback of the home.The proposed open post construction of the tiered decks will permit drainage to be maintained.Stormwater drainage in this neighborhood is challenging. Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn.Stat.§216C.06,subd. 2,when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78.This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.This condition is not applicable,as the use for a residence is an allowed use in the LR-1B District. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling.This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.The topography,lot width,and the garage's proximity and orientation to the property line are special conditions unique to the property. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The topography, which drops off steadily as you move toward the FILE#17-3940 15 May 2017 Page 5 of 6 lake, the lot width narrowing from the lake toward the road, as well as the nonconforming location of the garage on the lot make this property unique. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Options for a conforming connection to the existing garage are severely limited on the property.Staff finds the defined height and setback variances for the house are necessary to preserve the property right of the applicants. The requested hardcover variance and the additional encroachment proposed for the tiered deck are not necessary for the preservation of a property right. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health,safety, comfort or morals,or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the requested defined height and setback variances for the home will not adversely impact health,safety,comfort,or morals; nor will it be contrary to the intent of the Code.The requested hardcover variance and the setback variance to permit a 2 foot setback for the tiered decks is contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty.The lot width;the location, height,and size of the existing garage to be connected to; as well as site topography, create practical difficulties affecting the Property. The setback and defined height variances for the home are necessary and will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants. The requested hardcover variance and the setback variance to permit a 2 foot setback for the tiered decks are not supported. The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Septic System Status The property is served by City sewer. Practical Difficulties Statement Applicant has completed the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B,and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Practical Difficulties Analysis There are numerous practical difficulties inherent to the property supporting the setback variances to connect a new home to the existing garage such as the drainage, topography, the location of the neighboring homes,the way the lot narrows as it goes from the lake to the road restricting the buildable area to approximately 20 feet in width at the narrowest (and 21 feet where it connects to the garage), and the location the garage to be connected. Staff supports the setback variances to connect the home to the garage. Staff further suggests denial of the additional setback for the tiered deck and hardcover exceeding 25%. The decks should be reduced to match the 5 foot setback of the house;this will also reduce hardcover by at least 67 square feet. Further staff supports the variance to the defined height. Engineer Comments The City's engineer has preliminarily reviewed the plans. He did not identify any concerns. He will FILE#17-3940 15 May 2017 Page 6 of 6 conduct a more thorough review at the time of the building permit. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning staff suggests approval of the side setback for the home to be 5 feet from the side lot line; approval of the average lakeshore setback for the house and tiered decks. Denial of the 2 foot setback for the tiered decks; and denial of the hardcover in excess of 25%. The variance resulting in a defined height of 32 feet is also supported. The Planning Commission may consider the following alternative motion: 1. Approval of the requested variances as proposed: side setback for the home at 5 feet; side setback for the tiered decks at 2 feet;average lakeshore encroachments for the home and deck; and hardcover at 28%where 25% is permitted. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Narrative &Additional Materials from Applicant Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit E. Proposed Survey/Site Plan Exhibit F. Submitted Hardcover Calculations Exhibit G. Drainage Information Exhibit H. City Engineer Comment Exhibit 1. Height Analysis Exhibit J. Plat Map Exhibit K. Property Owners List Exhibit L. Aerial Photos I1 i 1 1 City 'of O ono PC Exhibit A Variance Application #17-3940 { 1 Street Address: t /t,r 2750 Kelley Parkway Application# 1 ~7 ci U f "` YO Orono,MN 55351 Date Rticeived: 4 j , _ / .-7 Main: 952-249-4600 Staff: 11,A C fax '5 952-249-46 i -- .` A Melling Address:? Fee: $700,• '. A. P.O.Box 66 Escrow 1 � C t., z c t i{t G e cc' Crystal Bay,MN$5323-0066 Notes: / \,-' �j �G3 1 r SHO Please complete. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agenda. SITE LOCATION: 4105 Highwood Rd. Mound MN 55364 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: ' Request for side andi lake set back variance (attach additional sheets as necessary) APPLICANT INFORMATION: check here if Applicant address shoiid be used for billing Applicant Jason&Anelise Peterson Phone(Primary): l MailingAddress: fi51-558-1100 i 3128 Fremont Ave S i City. MPLS ZIP: MN Email: lasgoodav(g)gmail_mr► PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: o check here if Property party Owrber is same as applicant O check here if Property Owner address should be used for billing Name: Jack&Eileen Stewiart Phone(Primary): , Mailing Address: 17405 23RD AVE N Email: City Plymouth ZIP: 55447 •APPUCANT AND/OR PROPERTY OWNER: • Certify that the information supplied iti true and correct to the best if his/her knowledge. The applicant and property owner recognize that they are solely responsible for submitting a complet i application being aware that upon failure to do so,the staff has no alternative but to reject is/ until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of its potential merit. 1 • The Property Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this app1 ation and further authorizes reasonable entry property by City Staff,consultants,agents,Commission and Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. • Property Owner and/or Applicant acitnowledge they must be ' nt at a6 scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or property owner iunable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized;representative attend in place of the applicant/owner and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. i • information will be distributed via e-ma(J. U Applicant Signature: jape etetSDn Date:I 4-17-2017 Applicant Signature: mise PetePsoM Date: 4-17-2017 Property Owner Signature: al Date: 4 111 (2.0t7 Property Owner Signature: i e;24./lil y, ` i Date: 4-ll- l Variance Application—January 2017 IECEIr VE D Page 4 APR 1 9 2017 # 3940 CITY OF ORONO DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY In accordance with Minnesota State Statute 13.04 Rights of Subjects of Data, Subd. 2, "Tennessen warning", we would like to inform you that your request for a permit or license from the City of Orono or any of its departments may require you to furnish certain private or confidential information. You are notified that: 1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. 3. The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permit or license. 4. If your requested permit or license requires Council action to approve, some information may become public. 5. You have certain rights under Minnesota State Statute 13.04(see following page)to review private data on yourself. 6. Your full name is required to process this application or permit. Jason John Peterson First Middle Last 3128 Fremont Ave S Address MPLS MN 55408 651-558-1100 City State Zip Phone understand my rights as stated above. Cason Tee-son Signature RECEIVED APR 1Q2011 Variance Application-January 2017 Page 14 :e 3940 1V1 CITY OF ORONO PC PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM Exhibit B #17-3940 This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City. Minnesota State Statutes Section 462.357, Subdivision 6(2) requires that practical difficulties be demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted. The difficulties must be unique to the property as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic situations are not considered valid practical difficulties. In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council practical difficulties having merit must be demonstrated. HOW DO I PROVE A PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY? This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if practical difficulties exist and how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove practical difficulties,address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance is justified. The information the City receives is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will not be considered. Please address each of the twelve practical difficulties criteria as they relate to the request, if they do not apply, write N/A in the space provided: 1. "The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Chapter." NA 2. "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." NA 3. "The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." Correct the character of the area will greatly improve with removing of the structure and hard cover that is 35Feet from the shoreline and the new home will fit in with community. 4. "Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." NA 5. "Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes,Section 116J.06, Subd. 2,when in harmony with this Chapter." NA 6. "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not allowed under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located." NA RECEIVED Variance Application-January 2017 APR 1 q 2017 Page 7 3 9 4 0 CITY OF ORONO 7 "The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling." NA 8. °The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property." 9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." No, The conditions do apply to most other homes on the lake side of Highwood Rd. In our view if you look at exhibit 1) Most properties in area have setback variances that allow for best use of the lots. 10, "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." Yes, Having the home placed on the lot further to the west will align the home more square with the garage and lot. This will also allow proper green space on the east side of the home for moving accessories up and down the lot. In addition it will better preserve the drainage for storm water as part of thelan will update the drain tile and retaining w, 11. "The granting of the proposed variance wilfnot in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals,or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code." Yes it will not impair. 12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty." Correct. Difficultyfrom the architectural standpoint to add the proposed home onto the garage. Ilifficiilty in maintaining tha avisting watar drainages system and not have Miura water prnhlamsin garages and home.si Failing wall (exhibit 2) The proposed plan will provide an update to the water shed as well as provide a"foundational wall to last for the future" Practical Difficulties Statement Should you feel the practical difficulties cannot fully be described in the above criteria, describe the practical difficulties preventing compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary): Our proposedplan focuses on the followingkeybenefits: 1) Improve lake shore qualitybyreducing P P existing impermeable hard cover only 30" to lake , Reducing existing footprint that has been in place for over 20 yeai 2) Replace hard cover with permeable grass and soil area to provide a more natural lake shore and allow for more land/dirt to Improve water filter percolation drainage to the lake on both east and west property lines. 3) Update the current failing drainage system that is overflowing into garage and top of the lawn we will ensure the updates for all water drainage continue to flow along property line front top of road to lake with optimal percolation. 4) Providing an increase in value to the community with a similar visually appealing home to the neighborhood. We are look forward to adding new value to Orono and the neighborhood and raising our new family! RECEIVED Variance Application-January 2017 APR 1 q 2011 Page 8 3940 CITY OF ORONO PC From: Jason Peterson Exhibit C To: Melanie Curtis #17-3940 Subject: Re:4105 Highwood Rd/#17-3940 Date: Wednesday,May 03,2017 9:40:20 AM Attachments: Hardcover worksheet.odf 4105 Highwood Rd.5-3-2017.odf RE Requested documents for Variance letter.docx 5-2-17 Al Application Footprint.odf 5-2-17 A2 Application South and North Elevation.pdf 5-2-17 A3 Application East Elevation.pdf 5-2-17 A4 Application West Elevation.odf Hi Melanie, I agree we all spent lots of time on this and added many details to ensure a smooth process. It was such a short time line we were up against and I am learning lots on what is required so appreciate the extra time to get more details together. I am glad you received all the documents. I have attached electronic version of all documentation as well as I know that was requested previously. Also after many conversation with Designer and Tom B. and the neighbors we feel that having a home with a deck is a critical component of a lake home although I do recognize it goes over the 25% although as you see we are suggesting many water mitigation efforts to over compensate for this small overage. We are also open to other water mitigation efforts that are suggested. As you see we also re-designed the home so that there is no variance needed on the east side of the property line. Removing almost 1,600 sqft of hardspace that is within the 75 foot setback and reducing from the current 33.9%hardcover for 20 years is a significant improvement to the community and lake shore quality. Please let me know if you see any concerns or items that we need to address prior to the 5/15 meeting. Have a gooday Jason On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 9:27 AM, Melanie Curtis<MCurtis@ci.orono.mn.us>wrote: Jason Are you able to have your surveyor send the PDF of the revised survey?The quality is so much better if they send direct rather than me scanning it. Thank you. E__.A 16 1-1---.._------------- 4! '',.:.`" \vit:•... ri moo: 'l'1 z A 1t , . t ' • 4$ _ t ' ''.'6:49'‘‘..7,.041,.;:'. . ' ,fit i_� moi. _ t%,,,P.4. .. '.• ' j t' 1 44 .i= fir$ ' l,v -4 'ISP 'f' ' ,... ..1,:es- - ' .,- \• •- 1 s r ^i+,rrtF RECEIVED APR 1 9 2017 3940 CITY OF ORONO e-F , IA IT a_ Replace Failing Wall with New home Foundation Wall and ensure all watershed meets the MCWS District and Improve water - percolation p1 I F 1 ,ra rte t s Y, or....0 i ww * 4,1 . iik.,, . , i_,.. ..w ,, 1 , r Y 8. $ RECEIVED APR 19 2017 3940 CITY OF ORONO eJs-16r.b e_ CIA until_ �A lir stoape _ . iv? #kn � , •� .. ice` P� ,� 14,6u �V`6�f� We will update ���n�'� b J pending ; A`L'' -° variance . : �� approval the Cut ?!-.. ,,' ' . 'r �* 7' TY up and ,. y. - irl sentiment filled . . 1' t •� • •. old drainage �'". ' ' '' system '" ,• ~J .• F�r ; h.' ' Tp ? r* #. y ^+ �^i .s.c. t + fien tt : i it . .! M,q :. Ail i vjy� c s _ j. ,a A• . 'i'I' 1 iii. •-. .f► N. Y f. RECEIVED APR 1 9 2017 3940 CIN OF ORONO ONOMO AO ALIO n '/ 6 LW?, 6 0 AVW '�,! „0-,1 = „S/I, 1 ' 9 ®3n13331:1 J.NIdLOO COdOd I I UIDM LU 4 I „0—,01 „0—,12 ( oo4 1 1 „0-,5 „0-,131 „O-,t, ,-I � 6��, 3 I ,-- I I ,1 1 i .1199 ZZZ i' 1 913A31 TTV lb` /' 1 i >403C Q3SaOdOZld /' __- i 1 i i i 4. 4. • At 0...••••,•. --- -4 e.aoe ci•9 - -r i = / _ 14i--- ,e, •:ammo. 1 i 1 i i I I - I I 1 i 10 ED 01 0'im ml IA , Al 1r l Vg G90I r! W 6 1 m 3l.•4OH d3SOdOzd ! = F • m = j 1 I j h I I • I $ I p I i — p ��t`s" < I ... i , 1 i , wm rwm i Q3SOdOZid i i I I I 1 I I I 6 3Vb`24174V ONIiSIX3 � O 1 I I I I I I I I 1 j 1 I I I I I ( „0-,LL 1 i I j 1 1 I Z 70 0XNO -0 3 . rnIOn m ... . • ... ..• .. - 0..,- r- [00011 - .. 0 ®®®® • • • 1 z ®®®® • x DODD z G\ 70 22'-0°t 0 i6\ 10 lip ICD ICD I8 Ip .0 1 I I i i m i X I i i N I i i —I — — _____• �,____ -r;-r, r-1..�r�r�L r.r;r..J.r,.r r:.r r_� r.r .—•----- GN h•}F.}F.}F.}F.}F.}F.Fh•}F.}r•`.•}00 =} } t}h.}OD h—}r'N L•4•M } }�h•} :}r:}r:}r:}r:}t'Le'.4�r-}r-}r••}h Kw a t.iitra }t -+`:t ON will r - - - - t . . . ? \G>\r r r r , r , r , r r hhr'1 r.100 00 . 6r . r' rlrL / IP L .' .1•.C. -i'}r:}r:}r'}r'}r'}r'}r' r'}r: 7r r h r r h rr h i ',11: �'1 Iii j; pi,: .1 ,IIi3' .t .Ia• Et-E. tD`r'`r'` : ''''r'`r'`r' r' r' I� kr•A_3i %I,•1:•• • '• I•.!.ItE•=.' • • • �eF•}F.}F.}F.}F.}r.} .} .} .}F. i ��7lr ,El_3 'I t� EI.:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r;Fr' -0,.. .' t �._, ► 1. 1.. J I rtcI ?[® F ` r ` ` ` ` r , r , h , r , h • •' l E1.11, �'EI,I�'I�IErI''� E1'. " r. .i1.. t= 1'' 1r' r' r' r' r' r' r• r' r' ■� f1 ■1 � =.34.1... .i11•.• _. : 1 , h h r h r r r r r kilt:� I L I� . -- I' '- E '`r'`r'`r'`r''r'`r•' �"`r' II, t 1. 41" - -- I'1• F - I II�:.�- ..,)%-,)%-,1%',.)..F'.,)%.,1-t:', !.F•}F•t F%)%' 1: i) l• •I I•,C - �'•, - :- . , r. r. r. r• r,`r. L. r` It.II E��� IBM" r �I _ _ . InJi'll r. r. r• r. r r. ')" r �'} } } } } O } : = _ _ ' _ r I . � ' ` t, t • ' e--,n- .' ' =br , r Ih r hIF F . F F -1I1 — • .0 1 - --- r' f I'I. r l -I r•E J.•$LIIi;i1•iIi r_ I J Ir. I I I .I1' r i� E�..��� f'111. . r }F.}F.}ri..}F.}F Fh•, 3 F Fh: iii i uirl,,E 16:��1■ '��121i t-`•r .`r - t -I. t` � IF,' } ,Fr:Fr:Fr:Fr:Fr:}r: m• }r �, I I. 1 '4/'�' - F � r � r , rlrlr . r � r . rLh ``'�' I I 1• •. :vf.i. :}r:}r:}r:}r:}r., Ff. : 1. ‘hi —JIl r r F '.}�• r,�l- 11111111 'I• 4 L ,, L t L ♦ L I Cr ® F }F.}`.} .} '}`.}` }. } .} . ' ' ' ' ' . . ' `. ' ' ' r 'l l I` lFI L L l` LFLFLF1F4FlFL LFIFiFLFLF ` r :}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r:}r r r , r r r r h h r r r r h , I. h , • , r r , h r r h r' r'`r'`r•`r'`r'`r•`r'`r•'r'`r'`r• h' h' r • r•`r'.r'`r'`r'`r F.}F.}F.}F.}F•}F.}F.}F.}F'4 4 '}F.}F.}F.}F.} .}F.}10I-0" r'}F •`r•`r'`r'`r•`r''r'`r'`r''r'`r'`r'`t''r'`r•' 'r `r r r:`r n F.}F.}F.}F.}r•}F.}F.}F.}F.}r.}F.}F.}F.}F.}F.} .}F.}F.}F.}F. F }F 30'-01 r 1,4XI1"1UM JI ' r• r' r' r• r' r' r' r' r' r' r• t' r• r'` '`r' r' r. t . 1 . r =K paF.}F.}F.}F.}F.}F.}F.}F.}F.}F.}F.}F'}F.}F.}F.}F.}F.}F.}F.}F.}F.}F 3::,- L L . I L l L L . . , l L L . L L l I L L O :}r:}r4 '''''et }r4 'I's :}r4 '''' :}r4 .1'. :}r:}r:}r:}r4 .)". '0''4 Ti ,_,......2.-..L...._2_. .! 1 ,.t.J_._t—t_._h.!_!.._L.2.......L. r_._F-,_t.—P ------ O o O _`' 1 i 1 I 01' 611 W i 01'I I I ca> -- - - - T j W r o U p I I I W Q II I X I I I c) I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I ' 1 I I 1 _ I I E _ 3 ; I I i E = 13 ' I I I _Z-_- _ _- 1 ; = zE. i3 ----i - a _ 11111 r - �� -� • II !iiiiIiii, _ � - -- , , • E'=-111111111111 w _ • •. . E.5,110111111I1I I 0 IIIIIIW -- ------ . - -. 4-' fIIIIII ,- -__ - ��_ . . J 1,zl0jjljljljll4- -- - _--^ - �� � 1Iiiill 0 Z -- - • -• • • OE - to • �� h � E. _--- - -- - I I •.O.E,=. INIIIIIIIIIII w -_ - - 11 1 1 1 1 1 {_J-'- _ _-_J -u _ _•.�. .E-:110�11111N1i1� .� rr _ _ _ _ 1_ �l 11111 io 0 _.71_,-._.1_ --- -, C� - - i _ ► U. r I. . ••E__ =9.11 4I J_'_y_ ■ • • 1. .__•,3,.'I • • ��il:i i-E h 5�-- N 1• •t=• 13.11. l 4 - 0 •I - 1� -,�_ 1. .E_'&3.�i- iJ.mi.• _ -2 q -:-_,-_J-} - , - - p- 1�3 t i • ��i��ILI� u - 4 -_-_ • 1 I. - 1III ,1:; 1. -1 I• 1I�I Ili,II ICU 1111 • .,, I .4 _- ;1 - _-_r7 ....1'''' .1 i . 11111171.11111 I. O U �� / r •• • . i11;1111 2 N - I. -_u_-�- Ell CO ' -II' ' �j'II��i l� �" —- II ' �Z\--—i_—_——.. :-',,.''.:••'‘,•"'.:'••,''..•- 'I.• . • 11 • 11 11111 it■11 ' I. .1 i . 111II 11111 111dlik il O 4 , Ii -_-_,7-2--_-_- + . . i . 11.11,111 1;111.1; tY ; -J�z 1 • Ili' lit ,'i'•I 11.11 ; a if- -_r-�`-� _ _ _ ► _ t 1i�Illi•ii 1i .ii •.Ii 11 1 • lI - 4 -------} i. .I i i111101 11101�111G11. 1� --•-- -►. •,•• • • • •. I 111 �;11 �0111111�111 1, —...11.,71...—_.1— I. .I •-. •. • •. i. •, iiItllla I..1 tr,l •irj,.lt • • I■ NI lig' I �11I■ Mils 1 /, --- 1—-3- i.• -I I. •, N*L 11!f$ Ji' lil,���i i— r I I • rill! 11 --_!'-:- Ida 1. III�l1 - �lill -_ -1- hl .,-------7-7, - • - - - 1�1� ( — — '1�1'` i = _ ! 1 E _ = 3 1 i = = 7 1 i = : 31 E = = 31 tC• C31Q i = = 3 ' E -C = 3 a E = = 3 ' tii i = = 3 ' E = = 3 ' '3 E = = _ i E E 3 1 EE. = 1 ' E = = 3 ' co N NI i = - 31 E = = 31 c ? 1 U i = C i 1 i LI r. 3 1 t : : 7 1 If i = = 31 i = = i1 t = _ 31 i = = 3 ' E = = 31 E = = 31 — Cir . . . . . . 6L7.11. , • i 4 { ' 1 ! t !, 4 k. t '14 i 11 , \\1 4 1111•11111M1111111•11111111•01-1111-11.-1111011111111111INIMI111111011MNIIIIIMINIIMIMOINIIIMINIIMIE - 111011•110MIEBNINII11101111111111111111115111111MINMENIIIMIIIIIIN111111111111111M1111111111•111111111•1101 11111111.111MINIMINS111111111111111111111111MIIIIMMIIIIIMMIIIIIIMIIIIMOSIII11111M1111111111111•11111111M111. lommiimminiimoiminloisMnemillisoMm1111mE111•11.1110111111MIINMINIlmollmelam IIIIIMMESIIIMMINIMIIIIIMMIIMMIIISNININEM111•01111MillIMIMIlliallImillIlmilll MIIIIMIIMINIMENIMIMIIIIIIIMMENNIIIMIIMIINIMIIIIIIIMINIMMIIMUMNINIIM11111•101111N 111•011111mONIIMNIIIIIIMMININIIIIIMNIIIIIMIIIIIIHNIIIINIMIMMIIIINNEMEMMENNINMIIIIIE - IINNIIIIIIISINIIIIIIIHISIMIIIIIIIIMIMIIIIIIIIIIIMMINIIIINIINMIIIIINIIIMMIIIOMNIIIIIIMMIIMINNIIINNIIIIIINNMMIIIIIIMINILIIINNIIIIIIINIIIIIMINMIIIIIIIMIIIMNINIIIMEMIIIIEIIIIIMIIEMIMMIMIININIMEEMMNNNIIIINNIIMIINIIIIIIIENIBMIIIINIIIIIIIIIII mouliMmomanilimininsisommilmilliiisiimmENNumgarnimmuommemon.....ENOmmilliiiimiSIONNIIMENIIIII•milimoliNimillaisMilliiMMEMIlliiMlimii11111•01111111M111111111111111111BISMENI 1111m1MINNIIIINIMMinnamMOINNInewiniemniummumonowoommmussammillmoloalmollsolilml=11111M1M11111111•111•11mOIMMINIIMiimunsoMilsmummlisinimmnimmuilmi Mallimingillminiammilinill1111nmenisalliiMMIIIIMIINIIIIMINIIMmongegmemmilaMMIIIIIIIIIMISIIIIINNIIIMS11111.161111M1111MIIIIINNIMIIIMISIMIIIIMIIIIIMIIIIMNIIIIINE111111111101111111NOMMINNIM11110111M1 1111111111111MMINNIIMMEMIIIIIIIIIIMINNIIIIMISIMMIIIMISIIIIIIIIMMISIIIIMIIIMINIIIIIMIIIMI111111M1111111MUMMINIMMIIIM1111111111NMEM11111m11111.0111.0111.0111.1=11.mmolimmoimmommemmi. musimumesmommiumg..........................mimmoimonms.1110.11MIISMINI1111111m1111M1111111MMIIIMMINIII11111111111•1111111111111111111MNIMMIIIEN111111111MMIIIIIIIMINSIMMIIIIMIllb.. Numwmmossosainimmil•mammewrimmurommemimummorommineoginlmillom11111111m1111111111•11=mmooloollmoommENENNENNEIIIIimmemosmoininglimminammajwirigam ming.........m............................................1111MMISMINIIIEMMINIONSIIIIISIMMIMMIBMEN1111.1111111111111111MINIMINIMININ11111111111111111•111111111MIMISIIIMMIIIIMMISIMMEIMIll Ms11111MillENNIIIIIINolliimailminME11111m11111NMINEENIMINOIIENIMMINIIIIIIIHMINIsemilMommomilsoon1101111ME11111011111MimmillimMigmallisimmenimemmomisommossommummlagginen ...........................................................111ENIIIIIIIIIMIIINNIMEINIMIIIMMEIIIIMMIN11111111111•11111111111111111.1111MINNIMMEIIMIMMIISMINIIINIMMIN1111111MiiiiiiMaimillIlisli 11111111111.1111.11111a11111.111.11EMS111111.MMININIIIIIIMIIIIIIIMM1111111•111011.1111111•2•111110111.11_111.A11111111111111.1111MMIMISIIIINIMININIIIIIMININOMMINIIMMIMMIIIIMINEN12111111111111111111.01M1=M101111111M11011111111 nimEMENONMENNINIMINNioNNImililiniMIWIMMImanassmilliMmuommmoginag0MimmeliNGEN111111111.1.11101111111111111111111111MINIIIIIMMBSINE11111.111111111.111111111MMIIIMIIIMIIMIIIISMI1MMIIIMMIIIMMI111111.1111.11 SIIIINIM1111111111111101.11M1111MIIIIMM11110111.1111111MIIMIMIIIMM1111111.111MIIMME1111011•0111110111111111.1111.111111111MM11.111.111.0111.1111111.11111111111.11MMENIMMEIMMIIIMMIIIMIIMINMENIMINIIMMIIMME11.1111111.1.11mnimme .........m..............iiiimm..........wimmoommingnimanionmINNINE11111EIMIIMMIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIIIMIIMIONIE1111511111=111111•11111111M1111MIONINMEN/1111111IMIIINNIMININIIIMEN11410110111111111 11M•11111111111.11MMIIIMM111111115111111,11111MINNININIIIMIIMIIIIMINMIIIIMIIMMISMEIMIN111111110.1111.nowlealimMelliiiiillinliMMIIINMEMINIIIIMMIIMEMMIIMMIIIINIMMIIIIMINIMMII.11.111.11111111111111111111111111Millinin ....mmom................m....................m..........IIMIMMIENDMENS11111M1111111111M11111111•11111,101111111111MINIININIIMIN111111111.1MIENIMMIIIMIINE11111101111111101111111INIMMINMINIiiiin 111111MINEMINNIMIIIIIMISISIMINIIIINESIIIMICENES21111.111111111MIIIIMIIMENEMINIIMINNINIIIIRINIMININIIIIMMIIIIIIIMMINIM111111111111.111MINIIMIIIMMENEVIIIIMI11111.111111111111MINNIIIIIIMMEMMINIMilisMinielliiiimni -‘111011101.11MMIMEMINI1111111111111111INIIIIIIMM11.11111111111111MIMINEMIMISMIIIME11111.1110111111111•11111001111111011111.111Maiiiii. 1171=11=1C11=11=111=111=111=11=11=1C11=11011=11C11=1CIGIC11171=11=1=1d1c11C11=1Cii=111=011=111=1=11===iicill . . . . . . , • . • - . . . . . . . . . . -- 2. •.. 2. '. 2. ". -. -. -. ''. •. ••• •. '. -. '. •. ". -. •••• •. '.. -. -. -. ".. ' • ' • ' • • • ' • ' • • • ' • ' • ' - • • • • ' • • • ' • • • ' " • • " • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . , . . -. - -. . • - -. - - . - - ' - - • • . - . ' - ' . ' . • . • - ' . • , • , • . • . , . , . , . , . , . , . , • , . , , , . , . , . . . - . • . • •- • - • •- • •• • •• • .• • •- - -• . ,• • -• - -• - -• - •• • •- . •• - -- • •- . .• . • • . '.. -. ".. -. ". •. ". -. •, •. ••• •. •.. •. -.. •. •.. •. ". •. -. •. ". •. "... -. ". ' • ' • ' • ' • ' • . • , • . • . . , . • • . • • • . . . . . . . , . , •. . ,. -. . . •, . .. •. •. •„ . -. •. •. •. . -. • • • • • • ' - ' - • • • ' • • • ' ' ' ' • • - ' - • • • • • • • • - • • • - • - - - - - • - • - • - - - • - • • • - • - • _ - • . . , . , . . . , . , . . . . . . , . , . , . , . , . . . - . . . - . . . . . . . . . , . , . , . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . .• . . , -. . . . •. . . . •. , •. . -. . •. •. - •. . -. . • • • 1.n.ri.n.n.n.n.n.11.117.1Nori.% . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •••• . .. . ••, , -, . -. • ••. _ . ••• . • . • . • . • . • . - . - . • . • . - . • . ' . . . • , . , . , . , . , . , . . • - . - . , • - - - • - - • •- • • • -- • •- • -• • -' • •• • •- • •• - •• • •5.- -• • •• • '• 111111111111111111111111111111111111 , 2 , : . 2 . .. . .. . .., . .. . ... . ... , ... _ ... . ,. . , • .. .. .. •. .. ., ,. .. .. .. .. .„ .. ., .. : ,. .. .. .. .. .. .. : .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . • . . .. . I — . - . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . , . •• • -- ••• • - ' • • • • /11111111111111111111111111111111111 • • ' • • " " ' ' • • •• ' ' ' ' • ' • - • • ' • • - • • • - • • • - • • • • - - - - - - - • - - I . . . .• . .• . . 11 I . , . , . , , , . , . , . , . , . • .• . .- . .- . .- . . , .• , .- , .• , .- . .- . .- ; .• . .- . .- . .• : .• . .- . .• : .• . .• II . '. •. ''. •. ".. •. ". •. •. -. •., -. ••• -. ".. •. •.. •. •.. •. -.. •. '.. •. '.. •. •. ' I I . •, •. •, . . .. . . „ , . I . , . . . , . , . , . , . , . , . . . • . .- . .- . .• : .• . . . .- . .• , .- : .• . .- : .• ; .- . .- : .• . .- . .• . .- . .• . .• ; .• - II . . . , . . . . • _ . •. . -. . -. . •. • -. . •. . -. . •. . • . -. , -. . •. • -. . II IIMIMINIIIIIIIIIIM=MMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMMMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINI= . . . , . , • , . . .. . .• • .- . .-- : ...- : .-- . .--• : .-- : .-- : --• . ...- . .-- .. ..-- . ..-• . .-• . .-• , I I --"IIIIIMMIIIONE=MINI11111111111=1.111111111111==1111.11=MIMIINIII - -.. - -,. .. .-, - -, ..- • • • • • • • • - • • • • , • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • -"•111111111MIIMMINIIMIIIIIIIIIIMII=MMINIIIIII=1•11= I I e6o . ----........................m.. -_,__.__.____.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . i 1 . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . . • . . . . . • . • . . . • . . . . . . . • . immummilimilmimmi 1 - -- I.__ ___._._ ---........................ 1 I --•isw...11rm,Inim . . . . . . . . r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . „ . . , . . . , . . . . .lial.ei 46“.1..110,11.1.a.sa.wei.a.".:1 • --"Ill11111111. • • I 1 -1111•11111111111=MMIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIMI ----.- 11041•11.--= m5INI==iiiir---miaM11,==.-NwiriMI.--=i7=1•11•MIN="-. 0 --=,W=maq1M1= 11iii 1 1 I I I --=------.7Trrl.-:.....- 11---.r.--.-,TO=--r•.i-iiimsmlll --:-.i- III .=..-•Tiwmill1=•- ---.- B..- . - -,_-_-_-.7.---....w=•-— -_p_=.----..=- 1.=-.--r.-.,....T.T:s.. --- -r.•=--=-----„,..-.-,.-.•- - I i -•••••=1.--.=.1 .-..E........ ._=-..i...........=-,:m =- . .=.,-...., — — — I -----■_,w,--Tim=z.zi-ire-m-.=11--=--imr.---...1.z.;-ir..-T,--.10=-...11.--ii-.-- imr.--.-• asinmr:_-.-rAmirmir--6=mram-,--aniir-lragimin 111111111.1111:II: iiimiliiiiiiiill i --......_._--,=1-.....• ._,- Nmaig.-.-__,=imipmaar - EXISTING GARAGE 1 _ •_.... --,...-...--- ... __ ---.--.....iiame.,,,ww.mm...yr., - ----,1k.---.2.--.-a-..---K.,-- 1 e5o -------- - __.._...._ ..,,,, I 1 i ,.. , PROPOSED 1-10ME PROPOSED 940 DECKS WET :.LEv,41-10N SCALE 1/0" = 11-0" RECEIVED r i ciMryA,Y0O01 F.)0R70?,, # 3 9 4 ,:_i) CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY LEGAL DESCRIPTION: • LEGEND: LOT 16, HIGHWOOD LAKE �, V / o� PREPARED FOR: FOUND IRON PIPE MINNETONKA, HENNEPIN COUNTY, JASON PETERSON • MINNESOTA �t 0 _ � p� (As NOTED) / ,�` Ak, �j Q�P` 'll ®,�� W/CAP #44109 R 1 / `1 �'�6 0 \� \� SET SURVEY NAIL C1 �4J ,�Dc p� 0 W/WASHER �) N °N —/ �� WELL --- s POWER POLE / ° \ (Z9 co ��2• P� ._2'. *\�� ' \\ ., 6 ® COMMUNICATIONS •Rc3 Pic o� O o� PEDESTAL '. c.:0 '' /I\ �o�� \\ " ® Scale, In Feet ,sw SANITARY SEWER Ls' 'C),\\ p� / ' \ 1�OSEO \ /° ' iii 0 20 MANHOLE -S- I I ; pROVE`NAY ��/ Or:, /0H OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE / `` OR ��.5 �lt, � �� , 22.0 wV,,,,,,,, 2 1 EXISTING ` �. CONCRETE SURFACE 3°, GARAGE TO o �� o -960' REMAIN v:t- �,' / 9S8 \��� /� BITUMINOUS SURFACE 95. \ �' 8.9 • 9 /°j� _ EXISTING CONTOUR SE # 4�pg 3 2- 50 �p0 / �� 934-- 441139 34 (TO REMAIN) �$ EXISTING CONTOUR NQU ? U1 •° a FROpOSE� i9 �<�qT (TO BE CHANGED) o `• C\ Hoo 505 e\ a FC'4- PROPOSED CONTOUR a A\-ii,_ oEA °R.�REO ir / ` / //' ,`` °�� Os ch ? O T °�N JEO / 7`'S R��° 0 '� PROPOSED SILT FENCE / v,\P'o 6� _ 944 � \ (OP OF W woo \1 �� e �'� C ' �pT S 11� it k 2 / y ---J i \• 944v.„0 DEC(q1 °�S�,\eP° \ _' N \— ' so'aNiV Ve'n ,,, l'''' MI °F 5.22 j G ° , tO i1 / CSC' / / X EL�ATSO II DECK / \/ i \ _ • ,1,/\ d �g34 i °�� , c 7Co o� �_ , x, C2' R J Aad \1 °9°S '11°°0/(9�6 • p o , Y�P.�R`Z01G`�`�P�E ,P, ` °P i 006 o k 92 NOTES: ' OCNII L d �ovt��N�, 1) THIS SURVEY WAS PERFORMED WITHOUT THE i�,`�PROX / BENEFIT OF A TITLE INSURANCE COMMITMENT. �E3 \• l 2) P.I.D.: 07-117-23-44-0014 (1 I / ' \ \ I ./ 3) PARCEL AREA: 8,377 SQUARE FEET (ABOVE \\ - ` I,, �� ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE OF LAKE MINNETONKA) 2• PIPE \ +`� ' • j • ' o ' CP `�,� 4) BEARING BASIS IS ASSUMED. \ ;/, • aSORN N/ / i j icy ,( 5) DATE OF FIELDWORK: 4-18-2017 / v 6) ELEVATION DATUM: NAVD 88, BY GPS \ �,g�• , OBSERVATION \ N- $ / 7) DRAINTILE TO BE INSTALLED ALONG EAST AND W WEST SIDES OF FOUNDATION - OUTLET TO PROPOSED RAIN GARDENS CERTIFICATION : HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS: I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report PROPOSED DRIVEWAY 429 SQ. FT. P` was prepared by me or under my direct EXISTING GARAGE 618 SQ. FT. supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land PROPOSED HOUSE 1066 SQ. FT. Surveyor under the laws of the state of WOOD DECK 225 SQ. FT. Minnesota. BOARDWALK 104 SQ. FT. * *DECK AND BOARDWALK BOTH PROPOSED WITH SIGNED : = L • ,,/_-• It X GAPPED BOARDS (PERVIOUS) Travis W. Van Neste, Minnesota Professional Surveyor #44109 = -a Michigan Professional Surveyor #46695 ,=,: 0 TOTAL: 2,442 SQ. FT. JOB # 2017022 ISSUED: 4-18-2017 o m -100 SQ. FT. (PERVIOUS) DRAWN BY: TWVN REV: 5-2-2017 TOTAL 2,342 OR 28.0% SCALE: 1" = 20 FEET VAN NESTE SURVEYING PROFESSIONAL SURVEYING SERVICES c 85 WILDHURST ROAD EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 V S PHONE (952) 686-3055 TOLL-FREE FAX (866) 473-0120 WWW.VANNESTESURVEYING.COM SHEET 1 OF 1 PC Exhibit F #17-3940 City of Orono voNo, Hardcover Calculation Worksheet i.:_, , Property Address: 4105 Highwood Rd, Mound MN 55364 , Fi/, Prepared by. SurSurveyor-Travis Van Neste Date. 5-2-2017 Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one)'/Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Step 1: EXISTING HARDCOVER In the following table identify all items of existing hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to Certificate of Survey(survey must accompany this form). Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict existing hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter within the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion. Key to Total Hardcover Item(Describe) Length x Width Survey _ (Square Feet) (Example) (Garage) (24'x 30') (720 S.F.) A Driveway 22 x 24 528 S.F. B Driveway Retaining wall ( Not within 75 feet) 1x30 30 S.F. C Garage 22 x 28 515 S.F. D Retaining wall around Garage (Not within 75) 1 x 50 50 _ S.F. E Walkway from garage to old home 3 x 40 120 S.F. F Cement Stoop rear of old house 12x13.6+4 x 10.9 206.8 S.F. G Cement stoop west side of house 4x38.5 154 S.F. H ( Deck on old home facing south 10x20 3203 S.F. I Cement stepping qonPs east gararyy &by home 2x2...X10 I 40 S.F. J Old Home 24 5 )(AR R 970 S.F. K Retaining wall west side pro party(Not within 74) 1x43 43 S.F. L S.F. M S.F. N S.F. O S.F. P S.F. Q S.F. R S.F. S S.F. T S.F. U S.F. ✓ S.F. W S.F, X S.F. Y S.F. Z S.F. (1) Total Existing Hardcover 2,960.8 S.F I Excludable Hardcover(See City Code Sec 78-1684): Driveway retaining wall Not within 75 1x30 30 S.F. Retaining wall around garage Not 75 1x40 50 S.F. Retaining wall west side of garage/home(not 75 1x43 43 S.F. S.F. _ SF (2) Total Excludable Hardcover _ 'l3 S T7 (3) Net Existing Hardcover [Subtract line(2)from line C.)] 2837.8 S.F. (4) Total Lot Area 8377 S.F. Existing Hardcover Percentage [(3)_(4)] 33.9 (Proposed Hardcover next page) Variance Application—January 2017 Page 11 City of Orono ��o.ti� Hardcover Calculation Worksheet i, rc'.1 'i Property Address: _ 4105 Highwood Rd Mound MN 55364 '� t�fN;P`� Prepared by: Date: 5-2-2017 Travis Van Neste-Surveyor Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle aneWfier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Step 2: PROPOSED HARDCOVER In the following table, identify all items of proposed hardcover on the property,keyed by letter to Certificate of Survey (survey must accompany this form). Include all existing hardcover items that are intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are within the 75'setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion. Key to Survey Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width tel (Square Feet) (Example) (Garage) (24'x 30') (720 S.FJ_ A Driveway-Update to meet minimum req 17.5 x 15 tapper 8 feet W 429 S.F. B Driveway retaining wall(Not within 75 feet) 1x30 30 S.F. C Garage 7708 618 S.F. D Retaining wall around garage(Remove) 1x50 _ 50 S.F. E Walkway from garage to old home(Remove) 3x40 120 S.F. F Cement Stoop Rear of old house(Remove) 12x36 206.8 S.F. G Cement Stoop/walkway west side of old home(Remove) 4x38.5 154 S.F. H neck on old home faring south(Remove) 10x20.3 203 S.F. I Gement stepping stones east of garage P.by home(Remove) 2x..2-by-10 40 S.F. J Old Hove(Remove) 24.5x38.6 970 S.F. K Retaining wall west side of property (Over 75 foot setback) 1x55 55 S.F. L Walk way from driveway to east side entry of new home(few) 3x33 104 S.F. M New Hwae Foundation(Add New) 29x41 W/Corners out 1066 S.F. N House Deck 5x24 with West bump out 275 S.F. 0 S.F. P _ S.F. O ---- _ S.F. R S.F. S S.F. T S.F. U -- S.F. ✓ S.F. W S.F. X --- S.F. Y S.F. Z (1) Total Proposed Hardcover S.F. 2522 S.F. Excludable Hardcover(See City Code Sec 78-1684): Driveway Retaining wall (Over 75 feet from lake) 1x30 30 S.F. Walkway decki g 1/4 apart first 100 soft exclusion 3x32 100 S.F. Existing retaining west wall(Over 75 feet) lx 65 50 S.F. S.F. S.F. (2) Total Excludable Hardcover 180 S.F. (3) Net Proposed Hardcover [Subtract line(2)from line(1)1 2342 S.F (4) Total Lot Area 8377 S.F. Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3)÷(4)] 27.9°/, Variance Application—January 2017 Page 12 PC Exhibit G #17-3940 1S ' 1 ._.-,n-L--� iiY ,I 1.1 i,,_.:i n -- -� . T • Water Mitigation Efforts Due to 8'" Proposed plan to reduce hardcover " Reduce hardcover from 33.9%far the last 20 years to 27.9% 9• �i ti 5" j , 4 Upgrading& Adding Drain tile- ..,.Te. — ;• ; Water basins clean outs to both 3 `rr eo ion t ‘;� /� ��� east and west side of Home & r4 /14f- . /. E garage. it oa 1 . t'R��GS_ // q/�qi£ "Upgrading the Swale on east side to 3 S 4 v3 ,C� .0„1, ` t �'� :r; slow water flow and increase Water t,► � •vii ,7.,..: 4' 1 ? \ retention- Percolation&filtration. "' ti` ;r'\ `, E'e �-- ` Adding Rain Garden to help �r ►= , ' 000 1• , ,�' - reduce storm water run off and Aid 1 1V ' ,. hop a R^ ) -, further water percolation ti .r�1 ,-o ` 1 i`" N vs 4 I y A 4t*OW C*° 4'pt J� *Removing Old 4 N.a . '.1 r ` Jam-A. ~ Home 1,573 sqft • •r i ,zo, at.....r,.-- of Hardspace all . �� i' • W within 39-75 feet " • `�-�''b 1` -, -- from the lake and ' � ,,,,•' - - replacing with �,�' P,/gam: , = a 4 retention graded — ` / - new grass sod ,,t �--976•.' �� .� ". ti �'�/ ` � .- t5t THE -lb- i T . . . � - Ir �. 1.301E \ .e ' I 1.4 " TONKA) - _ IT %, lL -'=r— ._! ,,.o4,t -,65t. ! a' \~ N e. �_ �S. 3 yV` ` - , A \ �- \v v N. ....:„....:,.,.> // \t ti\ AST ANG 'JR.?,POSE) _ r..FRTIFII'ATION • RECEIVED � 9 IJ MAY U ? ?��1t CITY OF ORONO PC Exhibit H From: Adam Edwards #17-3940 To: Melanie Curtis Subject: RE: #17-3940 for 4105 Highwood Lane Date: Thursday,May 04,2017 3:36:00 PM Melanie, Nothing from me at this point. Appears feasible. Adam From: Melanie Curtis Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2017 9:40 AM To:Adam Edwards<aedwards@ci.orono.mn.us> Subject:#17-3940 for 4105 Highwood Lane Adam Please review the survey and plans for the new home to be connected to the existing garage at 4105 Highwood Lane. Please provide written comments by or before Tuesday, May 9th. Let me know if you'd like additional information. Thank you. Melanie Curtis, Planner Direct 952.249.4627 Planning &Zoning Office 952.249.4620 2750 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 Email: mcurtis@ci.orono.mn.us Website: www.ci.orono.mn.us 1 1 1 � I of 'I; c cc 1 61 I• �'I �'I IMO c, 0 o o I I I HI d B g3 Ln Er L a1 � I Ch I I a) V x 11.1 T V (0 •t I I I To o 71-1- .rn-CI (-I:" a1Eg= E •o - •v) a) 2a) -a , ,, � � In rn - 1 0 p Q] c cn 2 --_:-...\-1--- 4-1 E-- I I � y oa °' eao 1 p1 r° c > t <a N 32 ft I I I ami s ‘„fp v p CI- a) _ I _ ;., L -0 cn E I� 1 1 I _ V a L L a) E = 13 I 13 a) •— 2 w E 13I • COI I I ( aa •IZ N • � � � _ _ = 1 11 1 11 t a' O }' % • E _ •— ‘'-11----r--71-- fir_ • • • �2'=1.1111 1 'U U }• v a) II m �--- - 'r:��- � - - '. ...1... ••.• ••- •E •E ru I•I•I' fp C 173 ti) al o to (13 .- •--------- •a� • sus : - - • - # :.E11111111 11 � I1 4 o o °) rn m Y r------- -----w- _-s__-� _ . _ •_ .'- E,_.^ 'it :I'I'flu'�I it c 3 x �, -o E •J'�__7--_� r L_, •�{_-7 ' 1 1 ' 1 4 na CU a) ++ to 2 a) _ - - --- _ r-s- I- — - •:-'• d1�z 1]111111111II I Na _ (° N en 01 4 0 r. • ..., MI -_� r+�_-_-_� • �; QE'=_=�,L�L Z a) E a) a) 3 rn a)IT _c a) _rill 6'- __--_� _— -r_-r_ • • •. • •,. • OE•E =EI I • 1_,------i-L- -r_..s • E=.-11i111111111I 0 :- ----* - -c 1 i •: :• :- r• . . : Hennepin CountyLocate & NotifyMa Pc Hennepin p p Exhibit J Provided By: Resident and Real Estate Services Date: 4 #17-3940 ree, -7 PlI 4 e ' 444 c', Imo, gels' a "000:11(4th 4,4 AW 4a 07-117-23- .. ?- 4,, j ,,_ ct 1 qt n s ;..t r J MI f79 pei ` 0, 'F'\ I '; 1 7- 3-44 I r Ili ,, ' ...." J 18-117-13-11 18-117-23-11 Buffer Size: 350 feet 0 60 120 240 ft Map Comments: 11 I I I 4105 Highwood Road Orono RECEIVED For more information contact' MN 55364 Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South MAY U 2 2011 Minneapolis,MN 55487 gis.info@hennepin.us CITY OF ORONO # 3940 PC RUN DATE:04/26.2017 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWN ERS LIST) Exhibit K #17-3940 38 07-117-23 44 0009 38 07-117-23 44 0021 38 07-117-23 44 0083 R S PROCHNOW&S B PROCHNOW D M SMITH&R G SMITH TRS ERICK G&LAURIE S CELMS 4075 HIGHWOOD RD 4175 HIGH WOOD RD 1535 HIGHWOOD LA ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ROBERT S&SARAH B PROCHNOW DOUGLAS M&ROBAN G SMITH ERICK G&LAURIE S CELMS 4075 HIGHWOOD RD 4195 HIGHWOOD RD 1535 HIGHWOOD LA MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0010 38 07-1;7-23 44 0027 38 07-117-23 44 0084 TINA PROVETTO NORA R PASSE JOHN W&ROBERTA J HENRICH 4079 HIGHWOOD RD 4:66 HIGHWOOD RD 4125 HIGHWOOD RD ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 TINA PROVETTO NORA R PASSE JOHN W&ROBERTA J HENRICH 4079 HIGHWOOD RD 4166 HIGHWOOD RD 4125 HIGHWOOD RD MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0011 38 07-117-2344 0028 38 07-117-23 44 0086 F L JOHNSON&D L FOSS JON LLOYD BAKKE S SQUARED CAPITAL LLC 4091 HIGHWOOD RD 4150 HIGHWOOD RD 4104 HIGHWOOD RD ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 FREDERIC JOHNSON JON L BAKKE S SQUARED CAPITAL LLC 4091 HIGHWOOD RD 4150 HIGHWOOD RD 261 SCHOOL AVE 1J240 MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 07-117-23 44 0012 38 07-117-23 44 0029 38 07-117-23 44 0088 ALONZO B SERAN III A:EXANDER BURCH/JAMIE BURCH PHILLIP M OTTO 4099 HIGHWOOD RD 4148 HIGHWOOD RD 4116 HIGHWOOD RD ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ALONZO B SERAN III ALEXANDER C BURCH PHILLIP MOTTO 4099 HIGHWOOD RD JAMIE L BURCH 4116 HIGHWOOD RD MOUND MN 55364 4148 HIGHWOOD RD MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0013 38 07-117-23 44 0030 38 07-117-23 44 0089 GARY L GERMUNDSEN 113 CUSACK&C M GRACE M WAFFENSMITH&D ABBOTT 4101 HIGHWOOD RD 4140 HIGHWOOD RD 4108 HIGHWOOD RD ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 GARY LAWRENCE GERMUNDSEN C GRACE&J CUSACK MATTHEW G WAFFENSMITH 4101 HIGHWOOD RD 4140 HIGHWOOD RD DENISE N ABBOTT MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 4108 HIGHWOOD RD MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0014 38 07-117-23 44 0031 JACK D&EILEEN M STEWART SCOTT G&CATHERINE ANDERSON 4105 HIGHWOOD RD 4132 HIGHWOOD RD ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 JACK D STEWART SCOTT G&CATHERINE ANDERSON 17405 23RD AVE N 4132 HIGHWOOD ROAD PLYMOUTH MN 55447 MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0015 38 07-117-23 44 0037 G W&J L APPLE3AUM JAMES M CLEARY 4109 HIGHWOOD RD 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 00000 GEORGE W/JOANNE L APPLEBAUM JAMES CLEARY 4109 HIGHWOOD RD 4109 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0018 38 07-;17-23 44 0038 M P KOCH&N A MARK-KOCH JAMES M CLEARY 4149 HIGHWOOD RD 4109 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 MARK KOCH&NANCY MARK-KOCH JAMES CLEARY 4149 HIGHWOOD RD 4109 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 394038 07-117-23 44 0019 38 67-1:7-23 44 0039S MUSGJERD&M MUSGJERD JAMES M CLEARY 4156 HIGHWOOD RD 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 00000 SCOTT&MELISSA MUSGJERD JAMES CLEARY 4156 HIGHWOOD RD 4109 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23440020 38 07-:I7-23440076 RECEIVED D M SMITH&R G SMITH TRS WILLIAM R&ANITA M ROUSE 4167 HIGHWOOD RD 4051 H:GHWOOD RD ORONO MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 MAY �� t DOUGLAS M&ROBAN G SMITH WILLIAM R&ANITA M ROUSE 4195 HIGHWOOD RD 405 i HIGHWOOD RD MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 CITY OF ORONO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS'ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM I(we) George& Joanne Applebaum of 4109 Highwood Rd. [print name(s)j [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at 4105 Highwood Rd also referred to as Land Use Application No, I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disappro - the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improv ment r s an. t the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date / 7 roperty Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building&Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. fr►M..***tf#lriiti*.****iMN********.**HYefitfM**.************** **.**MiNiiH*****...****ir*******.Awf******r/rk#M****** ******K ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS'ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM (we) Gary Gerrnundsen of 4101 Highwood Rd [print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed Improvement or proposed use of the property located at 4105 Highwood Rd also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. % Property Ow r Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building &Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. RECEIVED RPR 1 9 2017 Variance Application—January 2017 Page 15 # 3940 CITY OF ORQNO Hennepin County has developed electronic forms of certain property information databases.Hennepin County makes reasonable efforts to produce and publish the most current property information available.The viewer should understand,however,that Hennepin County makes no representation or warranties,either express or implied,or as to merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose regarding the accuracy and/or completeness of the information contained herein. # 39 40 RECEIVED MAY 022017 CITY OF ORONO PC Exhibit L #17-3940 • x tg kN fir, 5/''� f: N 1 -- ` f I. ti f." �' • A,./ ,; ttFtli 000. 14 • "r aals. • ,•' w y ) 'fi {`-:< F e t x k', •moi C 6'r.. - - rig, 7 r r I\ • 1 . ._ r ..., r>, r 4 r A 4f --- -. r• ri, . „, ,. # . ter- , ms,, _` gyp. .' , A VP, ' w r •• r ��oOo � ' „i X91 ' -_ 011 i �_ r� • ::::14 111101,_ '' " t ,.. • .5-- •, ,, \ ,goierA .: :; ` `e 5 r x y ti.,=. ;� • y-- { los .s `. � ... , ► , . te.,„ '� ' + a« � ice' • � .m ii a '\. , .., ..- j'A.. . 0,4,1*-- '* .;Iikti, a t • -"ice:''` tnY i' C.'" Facing North • t • or .n t s .� • i .o r., d A r • �, r t �, ?, •moi - Itt 1 , . 7k „., ,,,,,,,,„, , .., ,...,_, , ...., --- , , - ‘,) ''. , , 1 r9„.„...14. 't . �&`— mow. # \ - .. 'VI s ; ` � . �_• _ ---''''1._*., ...,I.iiiaok..7, ''.'i*'.1 „,,,..., _ - - -. f V . M • w -----..-- ''' '-'- \ 1 4'r \ a • w �. • Facing West ,t,,,, ...2.140...... Of 4 1, el 1 1 4 . ------1:44" f 1 , , ,... 1/ ' _ t 4 ..;,• / ,..".'.,;.:4-;1 ft. .:, • I'• .... .. , ,,,, t w , .i• • t ,p. 43 ,t tk I eft 0 ...... l. 0 - ' ...;*.• • ':\ II 11, ''s. cIlpi \,,, ::\' )4 $ ,--.:-. ' .111$'• .5 . • Ci. ese 01)11,‘ -° se i 4 / gb , At, e.• I,ir •ri9 , :' . ' A / 4;11161i,t 1 I il ..t. , '- 0 _C 4-, , - I . ' try ' "N = Cl * \ --- , 'I ' lk. if) .i.f, AI : tlo vp-t ....... :VV., ;01111frilima WRI- I •••••= 0 co.$ LL k _-- ,40 ' ''''' • ..----- ,...."4' 10- • • . • . VV ! ---••••"—Iri.• ' - •--- .1.t 4 . •••'''' .00. , 0 , ` VI' ' V) ' I.V. ., ,. ' L ' - f 1 i' .• , / 'I 4.11,1f s '" ' -- .)11' :I, .:: ,, ...lf - "*" , - I • ,, ..,4 0*• or,' ,,,, ' ''''' * , f, iI'' io-• ......., ' ' 'OOP ..•'1',-1---,, I Ify i Item 10 Date Application Received: April 19,2017 0A, Date Application Considered as Complete:April 24,2017 l VO 60-Day Review Period Expires: June 24,2017 y � To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator 4kESHo9-` From: Jeremy Barnhart,Community Development Director Date: May 15, 2017 Subject: #17-3941,Orono Public Schools/City of Orono, 685 N Old Crystal Bay Road, Text Amendment:School District zoning Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant and the City are joint partners on the development of an ordinance that would establish a zoning district to govern the public school improvements. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends support of the ordinance, recognizing that changes may occur before the items is reviewed by the City Council. Background The Orono High School, Middle School, Intermediate school, Elementary School,accessory educational,gathering, athletic and activity fields and courts, and parking areas are all located along Old Crystal Bay Road, and all are on property zoned RR-1B,which is Rural Residential, 2 acre minimum lot size. Schools is a listed conditional use;any modification of the facilities requires a conditional use permit amendment. This is problematic as use of the schools,signage needs,traffic impacts of a school are vastly different that typical rural residential uses. Strict application of rural residential standards to a school use may be unnecessarily onerous. "School zoning"was the 17th highest priority item identified last fall. Applicable Regulations: 78-418 Conditional Uses (11) Schools, daycare centers, uses accessory to a high school. a. Pre-kindergarten, primary and secondary public schools and private schools with a curriculum similar to a pre-kindergarten, primary or secondary school. Schools may include before and after school care for students. b. Daycare centers, nursery schools and similar programs that are not associated with a public or private school and serve pre-kindergarten children. c. Indoor ice arenas accessory to a high school provided the arena, including accessory uses, is: 1. Located on the same tax parcel as the high school to which it is accessory and is owned by the local school district; 2. Not separated from the high school building by a public road; 3. Operated by the school district or by a nonprofit organization; and 4. All structures are located at least 50 feet from any adjacent property zoned for residential use. 4 FILE#17-3941 May 15,2017 Page 2 of 2 Objective The objective with an ordinance modification is to recognize the systematic and frequent improvements undertaken by the school district. Sports fields get realigned, outdoor learning and gathering spaces are added or expanded, additional parking is provided. All of these projects, regardless of scale, require a formal Conditional Use Permit. In siting a new school complex, most common issues include traffic impact on adjacent roads, capacity of public services, and impacts due to noise with open field use. Lighting as part of accessory field use also can generate concern. It should be noted,to site a new school complex would likely require a modification of the Comprehensive Plan, and the current school is guided for institutional use. In expanding an existing school complex,these same concerns can be generated. Options. The Planning Commission should discuss a number of options to accomplish the objective Option 1. Amend the existing RR-1B zoning district to allow public and private elementary, intermediate,and middle and senior high schools as a permitted use. This would not require a public hearing for most projects. A new principal building could have a public hearing as part of the site plan approval. Option 2. Create a new zoning district specific to the school locations, allowing for schools to be a permitted use. Option 3. Do nothing, make no changes. Recommendation Staff suggests adding new zoning districts cautiously;the opportunity for unintended consequences is high due to the intricate weaving of current regulations(floodplain,wetland, hardcover, etc. Staff suggests amending the current zoning district,Option 2, allowing schools as a permitted use, provided they are to be located on lots 15 acres or larger. Schools on lots less than 15 acres remain a conditional use permit. The draft also suggests lighting,where the source is greater than 30 feet above grade, be a conditional use. This is intended to allow public review of sports field lighting as the light may be visible on adjacent parcels and streets. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission agree a problem exists? 2. Does the Commission feel that the proposed Ordinance adequately addresses the issue. 3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Draft Ordinance Exhibit B. Application Exhibit C. Narrative PC Exhibit A 17-3941 May 15, 2017 1 ORDINANCE NO. , THIRD SERIES 2 3 CITY OF ORONO 4 HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA 5 6 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES 7 RELATED TO SCHOOL USES IN THE RR-1B ZONING DISTRICT 8 9 THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS: 10 11 SECTION 1. Section 78-417 Permitted Uses shall be amended by adding text to read 12 as follows: 13 14 8. Schools on property 15 acres in size or greater. 15 a. Schools may include pre-kindergarten, primary and secondary public schools and 16 private schools with a curriculum similar to a pre-kindergarten,primary or 17 secondary school. Schools may include before and after school care for students. 18 Schools are activity centers in the community requiring flexible application of 19 ordinances including special events, uses, number and size of structures. In all cases, 20 Schools shall be developed and utilized consistent with the intent of the Community 21 Management Plan, wetland, shoreland, and floodplain regulations, and not adversely 22 affect adjacent property. 23 b. Uses and structures accessory to a school may include garages, shelters, 24 dugouts,press boxes, storage sheds, parking, sport courts and fields, bleachers, 25 scoreboards and lighting less than 30 feet from grade and any other items customary 26 and incidental to a school. 27 c. Indoor ice arenas accessory to a high school provided the arena, including 28 accessory uses, is: 29 1. Located on the same tax parcel as the high school to which it is accessory 30 and is owned by the local school district; 31 2. Not separated from the high school building by a public road; 32 3. Operated by the school district or by a nonprofit organization; and 33 4. All structures are located at least 50 feet from any adjacent property zoned 34 for residential use. 35 36 SECTION 2. Section 78-418 Conditional Uses shall be amended by adding and 37 deleting text to read as follows: 38 (11) Schools, daycare centers, uses accessory to a high school on property less than 15 39 acres. 40 a. Pre-kindergarten, primary and secondary public schools and private schools with 41 a curriculum similar to a pre-kindergarten, primary or secondary school. Schools 42 may include before and after school care for students. 43 b. Daycare centers, nursery schools and similar programs that are not associated 44 with a public or private school and serve pre-kindergarten children. 45 c. Indoor ice arenas accessory to a high school provided the arena, including 46 accessory uses, is: 1 47 1. Located on the same tax parcel as the high school to which it is accessory 48 and is owned by the local school district; 49 2. Not separated from the high school building by a public road; 50 3. Operated by the school district or by a nonprofit organization; and 51 4. All structures are located at least 50 feet from any adjacent property zoned 52 for residential use. 53 (15) Lighting where the light source is greater than 30 feet from grade. 54 SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its 55 passage and publication. 56 ADOPTED this day of ,2017 on a vote of_ayes and nays by the 57 City Council of Orono, Minnesota. 58 59 ATTEST: 60 61 62 63 64 Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor 65 66 67 Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of , 2017. 2 / PC Exhibit B City of Orono 17-3941 Amendment Application ❑ Comprehensive Plan / ❑ Ordinance Text / iR Zoning Change (check one) Street Address' Application# / 7-- .x7 V/ �O rO 2750 Kelley Parkway V Orono,MN 55356 Date Received: [/.1. -1 7 Main: 952-249-4600 Staff: �� fax: 952-249-4616 Fee: $700 A Mailing Address: Escrow: $700 y P.O.Box 66 �� .. Crystal Bay,MN 55323-0066 Notes 4kFSHOv-t Please complete. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. , ' SITE LOCATION: CAC 7,S, 1 w c/ h()� . 17 0t c4,131.41 l�'- APPLICANT INFORMATION: Kcheck here if Applicant address should be used for billing Applicant: (,)1:.....‘::. _ LwcA s Phone(Primary): 9s-1, _ 4,11_ ,.,r s- Mailing Address: ( �5- � CA4 C I v�., ' i, City: Or;�&i - ZIP: Email: ` � � U SS3� �'- -SI,A1—CU1 C`i CT,r�s.^00 K- 117 •, /'11k „. t/ 5 PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: .. check here if Property Owner is same as applicant 0 check here if Property Owner address should be used for billing Name: _ Phone(Primary): Mailing Address: City: ZIP: Email: APPLICANT AND/OR PROPERTY OWNER: • Certify that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant and property owner recognize that they are solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so,the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of its potential merit. • The Property Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff,consultants,agents,Commission and Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. • Property Owner and/or Applicant acknowledge they must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or property owner is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant/owner and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. • Information will be distributed via gmail ApplicantLL Signature: Date: Applicant Signature: Date: 11P Property Owner Signature: .--�� —'` Date: Property Owner Signature: Date: RECEIVED Amendment Application-January 2017 APR 2 4 2017 Page 4 3 9 41 OtTlf OF ORONO 41 -1-O City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form y 4. G. <1,ESHO (This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting.) For Office Use Only: City Planner: Meeting Date/Time: PC Date: Met with: What is the purpose of a pre-application meeting? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal,inform them of the procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: ‘.7g , _7 S, -74C 100, 7 7(_ Property Identification Number(PIN): I 311 crL 3I t 0900 L,3111)Z 3ZJ OnO' 281 j 2.3 3100in j Zoning District: Size of Property: J 201 gL 313a)10 LAND USE REQUESTS: 2.`gi1i2 333000 _3 , 2-3118L 333000 1 , 2,8lIg2. 3y3( )0() CI ❑Appeal of 0 Commercial Site 0 Comprehensive Plan Easement/ROW Administrative Decision Plan Review Amendment Vacation, ,'without subdivision ❑ PID 0 PUD Residential 0 RPUD,without sI Ordinance Amendments 0 PUD-Commercial subdivision " including Rezoning ❑Other: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTS: ❑Amend Existing CUP 0 Commercial/Industrial Use 0 Duplex Credit(per bldg) ❑ Grading and filling— 0 Grading and filing— 0 Grading and filing—with 75 feet of OHWL 501 cy or more Wetland and flood plain (includes seawalls and retaining walls) ❑ Guest House/ 0 Institutional ❑ Residential/ Guest Apartment Type: 0 Renewal of CUP Residential Accessory Use Type: Applicant's BILLS AND ESCROW: The land use application fee is for city staff time and overhead Initials: costs only. Property owner and/or Applicant shall pay for consultant expenses incurred in Property review of this application and/or additional staff time not covered in initial application fee, as Owner's well as provide an escrow in the amount of$ to guarantee payment of the above. Initials: OTHER INFORMATION: `Please note: Your site plan application will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this form will be completed by City staff. ,) --Applicant Signature: " k,,,I,cDate: 9 i`1 I t 1 _ % l Property Owner Signature: ,�/__�1 y-j'r RECEIVED l� (l4 (( — Amendment Application-January 2017 APR 2 4 2017 Page 3 Cirt OF ,# 394 PC Exhibit C OR©NO' 17-3941 NU ';` Project Narrative Orono Schools is seeking a zoning change to the following parcels: • 311823210002 • 3311823210001 • 2811823340003 • 2811823430010 • 2811823330003 • 2811823330001 • 2811823430005 These parcels are currently zoned residential and a school building is a non-conforming use. Orono Schools would like the city of Orono to re-zone these parcels and create an institutional zone where school buildings would be a permitted use. RECEIVED APR 242017 # 3941 CITVOFORDINO