HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-17-2017 Planning Commission Packet PUBLIC ATTENDANCE
MEETING DATE() 1 1 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
11. 1Ae.- ul\) k 1 c_l 2 ] ba v,> VALi P__S Q 3
2. � kU 0 u14 1f ki, pv, v L,Ir-vp�
3. - 71 E✓ /11q^/CAG/C/ .(617 i •e D ✓t- E.-.4..r..,_
4.
VjJ 667,4 46. LrA inns.
5. � �hcA <� \--\--ctegpte. A670 �( i 14�, 1-43o�/
rk ! ( \ ► ( ( i
6. Pa. et utl 1 14 a Pie Ie.
7. )(WJtZ , NUL- 1709/0/ 4- At-
8.V.-kiLL .. .._Ail- . # _ k tx tb. / e `.. ,ck. J2.. =;; 3
9. L/i/.,ir : 1 .LAIN %_ I ',1 SYM,.. AO .0-)
)� �
10. � ri214iM1'/. EIRWIlI I I P1.IAi III!lr%MI
11. •• .WC.r I AL 0alQ• lit '► E
le
12. it , _ AL_ 4 �eS Adli°r-
6k -
r
13. u`3 C: LE <N115 CCM 66 e,. 5(5
14. .1 (140/C, ,XIN\-I P--v 11 ‘70 41ZI'At -t-- 1/11- M. --3l
15.
V:1(LEGAL FORMS)\(FORMS)\PUBLIC ATTENDANCE.DOC
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
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,Chad Olson,Loren Schoenzeit,
and Jon Schwingler. Representing Staff were Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart,City
Planner Melanie Curtis,City Planner Laura Oakden,and Recorder Jackie Young. Council Member
Richard Crosby, II,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 Minutes of May 15,2017
Schoenzeit moved, Schwingler seconded,to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning
Commission meeting of May 15,2017,as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0.
2. 17-3942 CATHERINE SWEET,3405 AND 3407 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD,VACATION,
6:32 P.M.—6:55 P.M.
Catherine Sweet,Applicant,was present.
Barnhart stated the applicant is requesting to vacate the unimproved right-of-way between the properties
at 3405 and 3407 Crystal Bay Road. The applicant owns the parcels on either side of the subject right-of-
way and would like to sell 3407 Crystal Bay Road.
Barnhart noted the DNR must be given 60 days to review this request and that Staff would ask that the
public hearing be continued to the next City Council meeting on July 10`h.
The existing 20-foot right-of-way provides potential public access from the Dakota Trail to Lake
Minnetonka and may also have uses for drainage and other purposes in the future. The subject right-of-
way was provided to the City in exchange for the vacation of the right-of-way on the east side of 3405
Crystal Bay Road back in 1908.
Typically in a right-of-way vacation,the property reverts back to the property that provided the right-of-
way. In this situation,since the property at 3405 provided the right-of-way,that property would receive
the vacated right-of-way. If both parcels receive half of the right-of-way, 3407 Crystal Bay Road would
have lake frontage,which would likely allow for a dock.
Staff does not support the vacation of the right-of-way since Lake Minnetonka is a valuable asset to the
City of Orono. A vacation of this type that would limit the access is not in the best interest of the City.
Further,the applicant has not demonstrated public interest in the property can be maintained.
Thiesse asked if there are any other rights-of-way or easements in this area.
Barnhart indicated there are some additional ones further to the east.
Thiesse asked if Lot 19 can be divided if the easement is applied to that property.
Page 1 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Barnhart stated in theory,if the right-of-way were vacated,it would go entirely to Lot 19,and that
property owner could then choose to sell the entire right-of-way or a portion of it to the other property
owner.
Schoenzeit asked what percentage of fire lanes the City vacates and whether there is any history of doing
this.
Barnhart stated he does not have that information available tonight,but the most recent one he can think
of occurred in 2015. Barnhart stated to his recollection the road did not touch the lake in that situation.
In addition,the City has vacated unimproved rights-of-way,most recently in the Crestview neighborhood,
but that road also did not touch the lake and was not similar to this situation.
Thiesse asked if the land in front of Lot lwould give access to the lake.
Barnhart indicated that is actually city-owned property. Barnhart stated the City owns the four platted
lots on the north side of Crystal Bay Road,which prevents the other four lots from having lake frontage.
Landgraver asked what some of the general reasons are that the City would not vacate this type of
right-of-way.
Barnhart stated Staff does not know the potential future uses for this area and neighborhood and if any
ability to access the lake is removed,it is difficult to get it back. Barnhart indicated the right-of-way also
provides potential public access from the Dakota Trail to Lake Minnetonka and may also have uses for
drainage.
Landgraver asked how close the other right-of-way is located.
Barnhart stated it is approximately half a mile away to the east and that the topography also gets steeper
going that direction.
Schoenzeit asked if this has the potential to be precedent setting.
Barnhart indicated it might.
Catherine Sweet,Applicant,3405 Crystal Bay Road,stated the home at 3407 is currently empty. Sweet
stated she understands the City's desire to protect the lake and allow for drainage. Sweet stated she
would like to make an alternate proposal,which would be to do what the City did in 1908 and flip flop
the easement. Sweet noted her driveway sits on the easement and that she had received permission from
the City Council in 2004 to retain that. Sweet stated they could take that 20 feet of easement and put it on
the other side of 3407. Sweet stated she would then tear down the garage,remove the existing driveway
in that area,and then at some point tear down the small house and sell the property.
Thiesse asked if she had presented that to Staff at all.
Sweet indicated she suggested it this past Thursday when she received Staffs report.
Barnhart stated the challenge with that is that adding a new easement or right-of-way introduces the
potential that the neighbor might not necessarily be expecting an easement in that location. Barnhart
Page 2 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
stated he does not see a lot of value to the City in doing that,but that the Planning Commission is free to
examine that alternate option more closely.
Sweet noted 3407 does not have a dock but that there is a small stairway. The other three houses have
docks and those have existed since at least 2004.
Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:43 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Chair Thiesse continued the public hearing to the City Council meeting on July 10.
Thiesse stated he would agree with Mr. Barnhart's statement and that it would be difficult to recommend
approval on the alternative option since that was not noticed for a public hearing. Thiesse asked if the
Planning Commission can discuss that option.
Barnhart stated the Planning Commission could discuss it. Barnhart stated one option is to vacate it
entirely and the other option is to vacate the right-of-way and then relocate it. Barnhart stated it appears
to be in response to the City's concern about retaining lake access in this area.
Landgraver stated it appears the City would still retain access to the lake and that it would be a responsive
option by the applicant. Landgraver stated he would agree that the City should notify the neighbor.
Thiesse asked if Ms. Sweet would have access to the garage if there was no access over the easement.
Sweet stated she would not have access to either of her garages.
Landgraver asked whether she intends to sell the lot if the right-of-way is relocated.
Sweet stated at this point,if she does not get the easement,she will probably retain both pieces of
property and hopefully sell them at some point in the future. If the right-of-way is moved to the other
side,at some point the small house would be torn down and the property would become one continuous
lot and any new owner would have use of the driveway.
Thiesse asked if another application would be necessary to relocate the right-of-way if the Planning
Commission denied the request tonight. Thiesse stated in his view the Planning Commission cannot act
on that option without providing public notice.
Schwingler commented the Planning Commission can only act on what is in front of them tonight.
Barnhart stated that is true but that the Planning Commission could comment on the alternative option if
they choose. Barnhart stated he does not believe another application requesting vacation and relocating it
would be necessary.
Schoenzeit stated he is not in favor of vacating the easement without a new and similar replacement.
Thiesse and Landgraver stated they also are in agreement with that.
Page 3 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Schoenzeit moved to recommend denial of Application No. 17-3942,Catherine Sweet,3405 and
3407 Crystal Bay Road,granting of a vacation,with the recommendation that the City Council
consider approving relocation of the right-of-way in a similar size as the existing vacation in the
manner proposed by the applicant during the June Planning Commission meeting.
Landgraver asked what mechanism would be used to notify the neighbors of the possible relocation of the
right-of-way.
Schoenzeit stated the neighbors would have to be notified of the new option.
Thiesse asked whether the applicant would need to start over with a new application.
Barnhart stated the question is what would need to occur to acquire the new easement and that Staff
would make sure the neighbor is notified.
Schoenzeit noted the Planning Commission is not interested in the vacation as presented in the
application.
Barnhart stated it is not uncommon for an applicant to change their proposal following the Planning
Commission meeting and before proceeding to the City Council. Barnhart stated he will verify what the
exact process is prior to the application proceeding forward to the City Council.
Thiesse noted the City Council could also direct that another public hearing be held at the next Planning
Commission meeting.
Landgraver seconded. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0.
3. 17-3942 LORI ZAPPA,3670 TOGO ROAD,VARIANCES,6:55 P.M.—7:03 P.M.
Lori Zappa, Applicant,was present.
Curtis stated the applicant purchased the subject property last year and plans to construct a new 1-12 story
home using the existing foundation plus a 12' x 12' porch on the rear. Variances to lot width,lot area,
side yard and front yard setback are needed in order to build the new residence 4.2 feet from the west side
lot line and 18.4 feet from the front lot line utilizing the existing home's foundation. The applicant's
proposal involves reusing the existing foundation and much of the existing deck footprint for the new
home. The new home will have a higher pitch to allow for the one-half story attic space and the sidewall
height will remain eight feet as existing.
The applicant is proposing to construct the 12' x 12' on the rear of the house,a portion of which will be
constructed over existing deck footprint. The porch will match the proposed side setback of the home and
will be a new encroachment 4.9 feet from the side lot line. A portion of the porch will be constructed
over an approximate 5.5 foot portion of the existing deck footprint and then expanded another 6.5 feet to
line up with the western edge of the home.
A wetland setback for the proposed screen porch is required to permit the new screen porch on the rear to
be set back 22 feet from the wetland where a 35-foot setback is required.
Page 4 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Staff provided an analysis of the practical difficulty criteria and the Planning Commission should discuss
the individual criteria contained in Staff's report.
Staff finds that there are practical difficulties inherent to the lot area,width,presence of the wetlands and
the existing improvements which support the granting of reasonable variances. Staff finds the requested
variances to be reasonable and recommends approval.
Landgraver asked if the garage will remain.
Curtis indicated the garage will remain.
Lori Zappa,Applicant, stated she purchased the property approximately a year ago and that she would
like to create a better atmosphere both inside and outside of the home using the same foundation but
increasing the height of the house. Zappa noted there is a large maple in the back yard that is leaning
toward the neighbor's house which will be removed as part of this project.
Thiesse asked if she will be using the same foundation or putting in a new foundation in the same
location.
Zappa indicated they will be using the same foundation and that they will make whatever repairs are
necessary to the foundation.
Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:00 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 7:00 p.m.
Thiesse asked if she has spoken with the neighbors.
Zappa stated the neighbor on the right is no longer there and the other neighbor on the left is in support of
the project.
Landgraver commented the request is reasonable.
Landgraver moved,Olson seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. 17-3942,Lori
Zappa,3670 Togo Road,granting of variances. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0.
4. 17-3943 ALL ENERGY SOLAR ON BEHALF OF LARRY BARAN,480 STUBBS BAY
ROAD NORTH,VARIANCE,7:03 P.M.—7:13 P.M.
Larry Baran,Applicant,was present along with Kristin Sakwitz of All Energy Solar.
Barnhart stated the applicant is requesting a variance from the ordinance that requires solar energy
systems to be roof mounted. The property owner would like to place solar panels on the ground to the
north of the existing house. The property is over two acres in size and is exempt from hardcover
limitations.
Page 5 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Staff has conducted a preliminary review of the project for compatibility with the septic system and has
determined that the project is not likely to impact the existing or future septic sites.
Based on Staffs review,the proposed location of the solar panels is within a heavily screened area of the
yard and maintains setbacks from adjacent property lines. In addition,the solar panels will be screened
from Stubbs Bay Road.
Barnhart noted the notification area is 350 feet,with the nearest home being located 375 feet away.
Typically solar panels are mounted to the south to obtain the maximum amount of sunlight. The roof in
this case does not face the south. The array of solar panels would be 11 feet high at the back edge and 45
feet across. Barnhart noted there are some wetlands in the area but that the solar panels will not impact
that area and the project will not require a wetland delineation. The array of solar panels would be
located behind the front of the house and more than 50 feet from the right-of-way of Stubbs Bay Road.
Barnhart displayed a picture of the property from Stubbs Bay Road and noted the area is very well
screened.
Staff is supportive of the request.
Thiesse asked what the City's intent was to only allow roof mounted solar panels.
Barnhart stated to his understanding the City Council wanted to limit hardcover. The goal of the City is
to have solar panels integrated into the design of the property since retrofitting them on a house is not that
easy.
Landgraver asked whether the screening consists entirely of deciduous trees.
Barnhart stated a big part of it was deciduous trees. Barnhart stated the screening from the foliage will
likely go away during the winter but some screening will still remain with the tree trunks. Barnhart noted
the City does not require screening that prevents someone from seeing something year-round but they
attempt to mitigate it as much as practical.
Lemke asked if it would make sense to take another look at the City's regulations to allow ground based
solar panels.
Barnhart stated that can be added to the list of ordinances to be reviewed.
Larry Baran,Applicant,stated if the system is placed on the house,he would only be able to have a 3
kilowatt system,which would not be cost effective. The ground mounted system would be 8 kilowatts
and cover his electrical use for the most part.
Baran stated in 1986,his father placed solar panels on his building in Chicago for hot water. Baran stated
the system worked fine but then the roof needed to be replaced and the panels had to be removed at a cost
of$2,500.
Kristin Sakwitz,All Energy Solar, stated part of the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan states that the
City wants its residents and property owners to use their private land and resources to promote alternative
sources of energy,which this falls in line with.
Page 6 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:12 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 7:12 p.m.
Lemke and Thiesse stated the request makes sense.
Lemke moved,Landgraver seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. 17-3943,All
Energy Solar on behalf of Larry Baran,480 Stubbs Bay Road North,granting of a variance.
VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0.
5. 17-3944 WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ON BEHALF OF UGORETS,
8098,LLC,2520 SHADYWOOD ROAD,ZONING CHANGE AND MASTER PLAN REVIEW,
7:13 P.M.—8:25 P.M.
Tom Goodrum,Westwood Professional Services,and Alex Ugorets,Applicant,was present.
Barnhart stated the applicant is requesting a zone change and a master concept plan approval to permit
construction of a 40-unit condominium building on 3.11 acres to the south of the Freshwater Business
center. In addition, the applicant is requesting the property be rezoned to RPUD. An RPUD allows some
flexibility in land development and redevelopment and helps preserve desirable site characteristics and
open space. The condominium building as proposed consists of four stories with a defined height of
48.8'. Site improvements include underground and surface parking.
The property is currently zoned B-4 Office Professional but is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for
mixed use with a prescribed density of 6-15 units per acre. The proposed use is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. The proposed density is 15.63 units per acre,which is just above the guided upper
threshold for density contained in the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposal provides 84 parking spaces,with 51 of those spaces being located under the building and 33
surface spaces. Given that ratio,the City's parking requirements are met. Proposed hardcover on the
property is not an issue.
The building is intended to be a 40-unit condominium building,which is different from what was
presented at the sketch plan review. The applicant has indicated that condominium buildings require
higher ceilings,which has increased the height of the building. At the time of the sketch plan review,the
applicant was advised that the Planning Commission and City Council felt 30 feet was an appropriate
maximum height. Currently the proposed height is 48.8',but the southern third of the building, closest to
Shadywood Road,will be 36 feet in height since it does not include the penthouse. The defined height
may change since Staff measures height from the existing grades to the top of the building.
The applicant has prepared a traffic analysis which suggests the development will generate 232 trips per
weekday; 18 trips in the morning peak hour and 21 trips in the evening peak hour. Overall,the
development will increase traffic in the area about three percent. It should be noted that from a use
standpoint,the proposed residential use will have a lower impact on the traffic compared to other possible
Page 7 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
uses such as retail,an apartment building or a restaurant. Barnhart stated the majority of traffic in the
Navarre area comes from the south.
Other buildings in the area include the Freshwater Business Center,Culver's,Narrow's Bar and Saloon,
and Shadywood Villas,which was approved last year. Access to this site is proposed off of a new shared
driveway with the Freshwater Business Center. This driveway will line up with the driveway serving the
church across Shadywood Road. Hennepin County supports the offset.
The building is proposed to be 35 feet back from the Shadywood Road right-of-way line and about 35 feet
from the new side lot line to the north. This has not been verified with an updated survey or site plan.
The lot requires a 50-foot setback from the front yard and a 35-foot setback from the side yard. The
building will also need to be 85 feet from the wetland.
The applicant has provided some additional information regarding the residential properties located to the
rear of the proposed building.
Barnhart displayed a cross section of the building and noted that from the east side it will appear to be a
5-story building. The penthouse is set to the east of the building so it is not as close to the Shadywood
side as it could be.
Barnhart displayed a colored sketch of the exterior of the building and an aerial of the nearby residences.
A number of comments regarding the project have been received.
The applicant is also proposing to modify a portion of the shared property line between the proposed
condominium lot and the lot containing the Freshwater Business Center. A boundary line adjustment is a
minor administrative action but does impact lot size, setbacks,structural coverage,and density
calculations.
Staff has not reviewed the grading and drainage plan in detail but the plan depicts holding ponds. A
Conservation Design plan will need to be completed.
Staff is recommending tabling the application to allow for the submittal of certain information related to
the rezoning request. The applicant is requesting that public comments be received and that the Planning
Commission make a recommendation so the plan can proceed forward to the City Council.
Thiesse asked if the hardcover will go beyond the 50 percent if it is rezoned to RPUD.
Barnhart stated the proposed hardcover is at 36 percent and they would be allowed up to 50 percent. Any
amount over 50 percent would require a variance as well as mitigation.
Thiesse asked if the City is protecting the neighborhood by allowing condominiums rather than any other
use on this site.
Barnhart stated the applicant has changed his proposal from an apartment building to condominiums
following a neighborhood meeting. Barnhart noted the traffic numbers were provided by ITE.
Lemke asked what Staff believes are the main issues.
Page 8 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Barnhart indicated the main issues would be height and traffic. Barnhart stated he understands the
impacts of traffic on the area,but noted the lot is currently vacant and any development will generate
some level of traffic. Barnhart stated this area is not zoned residential,and if it is rezoned to residential,it
would require approval from the Metropolitan Council at a density of three units per acre.
Tom Goodrum,Westwood Professional Services,stated they have listened to the comments of the
Planning Commission,the City Council, and the neighbors,and redesigned their plan to be 40 high-
quality condominium units rather than 51 apartments.
Goodrum stated they are proposing the same footprint but that they have enhanced the building by
increasing the height of the ceilings. The number of parking stalls has also been reduced and another 15
feet of buffering along Shadywood Road has been added. The targeted tenants for this site are expected
to be empty nesters and retirees,which is also what the residents wanted.
Goodrum stated he appreciates Staff's comments, and as it relates to the grading and stormwater
calculations,those will be addressed in the near future if approval of the plan is received. Goodrum noted
engineering costs a lot of money and that they would like to receive approval prior to incurring those
costs. Goodrum stated they understand the main issues are height and traffic and that in their view they
meet the seven standards for the RPUD. Goodrum stated while there are arguments on both sides,they
believe they have a good argument for life cycle housing. Goodrum stated they are looking from the
Planning Commission a recommendation of approval.
Goodrum noted the site does have ample room for stormwater ponding and that they are within traffic
guidelines for that road. Goodrum stated in their view they are looking at a market that will have the least
impact on traffic.
As it relates to the environmental impacts,there is a 75-foot buffer to the edge of the wetland and the
proposal is close to meeting the additional ten feet required by the City but it depends on whether the
balconies would be counted. Goodrum indicated they have also discussed adding more wetland buffer to
the Freshwater Business Center as part of this project. Goodrum noted the building is not near the
wetland and the stormwater ponds would be located outside the wetland areas.
Thiesse asked if there is any way to eliminate one level of the building and construct a larger structure.
Goodrum stated the penthouse will make the project financially feasible and that they did look at other
options but they were not economically feasible. Goodrum stated unless more parking is eliminated,they
would not be able to expand the structure. The flat roof matches the Freshwater building, Byerly's, and
other buildings in Navarre. The proposed building at the west end would be 36 feet high along
Shadywood Road. Goodrum noted a pitched roof would be well above the 36 feet and that they are
minimizing the visual impacts with the flat roof.
Thiesse commented he is more concerned with the residents to the rear.
Goodrum stated a pitched roof would be taller than a flat roof.
Schoenzeit asked if additional acreage could be added to the property so the building could be lowered
and the footprint expanded.
Page 9 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Goodrum stated there is another 20 acres that are owned by Mr. Ugorets but that property is not
contiguous.
Schoenzeit stated the height continues to be a problem.
Lemke asked if it would be a deal breaker if the top level is eliminated and the number of units reduced.
Goodrum indicated it would be.
Olson asked what the cost of a condominium unit would be.
Alex Ugorets,Applicant,indicated it would be between$600,000 to $700,000.
Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m.
Tim Olson,2510 Old Beach Road, stated he has been asked to speak on behalf of the Old Beach Road
neighborhood and to give voice to over 200 community members in opposition to this project. Olson
stated they have had the opportunity to review the proposal for this site and find it to be entirely too large.
Olson stated the residents recognize that this would have a negative impact on the established community,
would negatively impact the quality of life,affect the natural habitat,unnecessarily impact traffic,and
steal away the night sky.
Olson stated the residents find that this project is in direct opposition to the Orono Community
Management Plan. Although the residents acknowledge a person's right to own and develop a property,
they support the community goals and recognize the proper development. They are not opposed to
development of the property but strongly oppose this particular project. There are rules and regulations
Orono has in place to prevent unnecessary and unreasonable developments. These have been put in place
after much thought and discussion. This proposal in its magnitude,if approved,would go forward in
opposition of the established community goals,city ordinances,and adversely affect the value of the area.
The City is guided by a Comprehensive Plan, a plan written in principle and philosophy. In fact,Orono's
Comprehensive Plan has been renamed to the Community Management Plan,which emphasizes the word
community. Olson stated the title of this plan has been chosen to signify its intent and purpose. The
word community is meant to stress the fact that this is,in fact,the plan and desire of the citizens. The
retention of Orono's small town sense of community and personal interaction is a guiding factor.
Throughout multiple pages of the Community Management Plan,it defines the purpose,and throughout
the introduction,emphasizes the guiding principles of a plan,not as a whim,but is meant in repeated
words to offer clear guidance for the future. When interpreting the meaning and understanding of the
Community Management Plan,implementation of new developments should be weighted most favorably
in the guiding principles,which are to protect and preserve Lake Minnetonka and its water quality,to
preserve our distinct urban lifestyles and land use patterns,preserve and protect our many natural
resources and open spaces and preserve our local character and identity.
The Community Management Plan includes six elements critical to the development philosophy. First
and foremost are environmental protections and land use. In this,Orono residents place the highest
priority on open space,preservation of woodlands,wetlands,habitat,with a particular emphasis on dark
skies allowing for the maintenance of a night sky free from light pollution. Additionally,land use which
Page 10 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
maintains a historic identity and character of Orono's urban neighbors shall be a key element in Orono's
land use planning.
The residents have had an opportunity to review Westwood's plan and we find it to be an overwhelmingly
and ambitious project,designed outside the extremes of Orono's allowable development of this area. We
have found it to be dismissive of community concerns and not particularly accurate in representing the
opposition to this project.
Olson stated they have reviewed Mr. Barnhart's staff submission to the Commission and appreciate
Staff's input. The residents have found that this area would need to be rezoned to RPUD for the
implementation of certain housing goals. Mr. Barnhart cites seven significant principles for the RPUD.
The Westwood proposal falls woefully short,failing to meet six of the seven;most notably preservation
of desirable site characteristics and open space and the protection of sensitive environmental features,a
design compatible to the surrounding land uses,sensitive to development in transitional areas located
between different land uses,and a development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In
addition,the Westwood site does not meet the RPUD standards,being half the required acres needed for a
development of this size. Further complicating this project is that it has a proposed density of 15.63 units
per acres,which exceeds even the maximum allowable density for a properly sized RPUD site,which is 6
to 15 units per acre allowed for the site.
Further challenges outlined in Staff's report include the building exceeds the maximum allowable height,
is designed with a nonconforming roof,fails to meet several setbacks,and provides for no open space.
Additionally,traffic continues to be a great concern for this area. Having experienced this on a daily
basis,the residents can assure the Commission that additional traffic concerns from a project of this
magnitude have not be adequately addressed to this point,particularly when paired with anticipated
growth in areas north and west of Navarre.
On its face,this plan appears to ignore the primary and driving tenets of the Community Management
Plan for the benefit and development of this particular parcel -a benefit that is being extended to one
commercial developer at the expense of the citizens of Orono and its neighboring communities.
Olson stated there is a reason Orono has a Community Management Plan and established zoning
ordinances. Although the residents appreciate the flexibility of a project,flexibility should not
fundamentally change the meaningful restrictions that are in place. The residents ask the Planning
Commission to take notice that Westwood is asking the City to take an undeveloped lot that is not large
enough to trigger an RPUD and then proposes building a structure that exceeds the maximum number of
residential units for a properly sized lot and then proposes the building be constructed with a
nonconforming flat roof. Even with a flat roof,it will exceed the maximum allowed height. To make this
building fit,the City must ignore setbacks and open spaces.
Olson stated there is nothing about this particular project that remotely meets the City's requirements,
preserves the characteristics of the neighborhood,is transitional to the neighboring areas,and is
inconsistent with the driving components and philosophy of the Comprehensive Plan. In short,this
project is simply too large; and if approved,will forever negatively impact the community and adversely
affect growth and future development in the area.
The residents ask the Planning Commission to not table this plan but to reject the proposal outright.
Further,the residents would ask the Planning Commission and Staff to encourage development of this
Page 11 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
property on a much smaller scale nearing the low end of the six units per acre,more suitable for this
nonconforming lot size,and to continue to review all future development proposals for this area under the
terms reflected in the guiding principles and philosophy of the Community Management Plan that is in
place.
Olson requested the Planning Commission and Staff also take an opportunity to review Exhibit G
submitted by Mr. Kirk Sherman,who was unable to attend tonight's meeting. Olson thanked the
Planning Commission for their time.
Shawn Macentee,2490 Old Beach Road, stated when he started considering the application,he looked at
the City variances. When looking at variances,the City Council may grant variances in cases where there
are practical difficulties and the weight of carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of this chapter,
taking into account the character and development of the neighborhood. In considering applications for
variances,the Council shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and
welfare of the community,existing traffic conditions,light and air,and the risk to public safety and the
effects on the values of property,and to grant variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions
with be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the chapter. The variance,if granted,will not alter the
essential character of the locality. The Planning Commission heard tonight that this five-story building
would be very uncharacteristic of this area.
Acting on the considerations alone does not constitute practical difficulties. There have been questions
tonight whether it is economically feasible to go smaller,which is not one of the considerations under the
statute. The granting of such variance is not to serve the convenience of the applicant but is necessary to
alleviate demonstrable difficulty.
The Planning Commission also heard a little bit about flexibility for the RPUD regulations. Although
flexibility may be something to take into consideration,the standards set forth in the statute say within the
RPUD district all development shall be in compliance with certain characteristics. The characteristics of
this potential building is that it requires numerous variances that are broad in their scope. The project
acreage is half of what is required under the statute. 78-626 lists four exceptions the Council can use to
provide a variance,none of which exist on this project.
Macentee stated the purpose of the RPUD district is to encourage sensitive development in transitional
areas located between different land uses and along significant corridors within the City. Installing a five-
story building is not sensitive and is intrusive and inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Macentee stated for anyone who has ever driven Shadywood at rush hour,the traffic lines up from the
intersection past the Narrows Bridge pretty much every day. Macentee stated he appreciates putting in
parking spaces for this number of people but they will also have people turning in and out of this
development on a routine basis,which will further exacerbate the traffic situation.
Macentee stated the residents support some type of condominium development on this property but they
feel this proposed project is too large. The residents are also concerned that condominiums are turned
into apartments when they are not sold.
Tom Lowe,2630 West Lafayette Road,stated his primary concern is the traffic. Lowe stated one night
last week the traffic was backed up all the way to Hazelwood in Tonka Bay. If someone is going to make
a right turn to go into Wayzata,they have to get into the line of traffic. Lowe stated there is no way they
Page 12 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
can get into that line. If they want to take a left turn,they are taking their life into their hands because
they have to cross traffic that is going north. Lowe stated unless Hennepin County is going to do
something about this intersection,something drastic is going to happen.
Lowe stated he questions the veracity of the traffic study because it looks like the traffic numbers were
pulled out of a book somewhere. Lowe stated they need to go there at 5:00. Lowe jokingly stated that if
this project is approved,he is going to try to get Old Beach Road opened up so traffic can get out that
way. Lowe stated the traffic situation is very serious.
Lowe stated he also believes the zoning should stay as it is.
Dave Schneider, 2540 Old Beach Road, stated this is not about Old Beach Road but that the proposal will
impact the entire area and will affect everyone that lives there. Schneider stated it is not about opening
Old Beach Road again. Schneider stated he is not a traffic engineer or an environmental engineer,but
through a grassroots campaign they have gotten over 200 people that are against this project through
petitions and meetings.
Schneider commented the residents have to remember that Navarre is finally,after 30 years,changing
with the dental office, Bridgewater Bank, and Byerly's, but that he does not know if this will help with
that transformation. Schneider stated once there is a real transformation at 19 and 15,there may be an
opportunity to develop this area. Schneider stated he is not opposed to development but that he is
opposed to this project.
Ralph Kempf, 3675 Toga Road,stated the preferred choice of the residents would be to leave it natural,
but the fact of the matter is that Navarre is one of the two urban destinations of Orono and this lot will get
developed at some point. Kempf stated he had mixed feelings when he saw it was up for redevelopment
since it would put a high density of people very close to the main intersection of Navarre. Kempf stated it
is a given that people on the sidewalks are the building block of a community,and to date,Navarre is
transforming and going very much in the right direction in his view.
Kempf stated he would ask the Planning Commission and Council to pay attention to something that has
been overlooked in Navarre,which has made the business district basically a no pedestrian zone. Kempf
stated in his view it is necessary that the City consider a way that people can easily walk to downtown
Navarre, and that the way things are set up now is that the people who are going to live on this site will
get in their cars to drive to downtown Navarre. Kempf stated hopefully the Council will look at a
pedestrian connection between the Navarre Park,the Navarre business district,and the Dakota Rail Trail
since there is not currently a safe pedestrian access to downtown Navarre and that trail.
Kempf commented it is unfortunate that this development did not happen before the Freshwater
redevelopment took place because somebody would have made sure that there was some sort of trail or
sidewalk along the road in this area. Kempf noted the City advocated for and got Hennepin County to
agree to redevelop the intersection in 2019 and that it would be wonderful if the City could figure out a
way to incorporate pedestrian friendly methods of travel.
Kempf stated in his view this kind of development is a good one in the overall larger picture.
Page 13 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Sandra Keegan,Walters Point Lane,stated the height is the scary part of this proposal,and once someone
puts up a building that size,there is no going back. Keegan stated in his view Navarre is changing for the
better,but that this property has been vacant for a while so they do not have to rush to develop it.
Tom Goodrum stated in his view they can work with Staff on the RPUD standards and that they are
willing to put a trail in.
Goodrum noted they have heard several times concerns about the size of the parcel. Goodrum noted they
have more than 2.5 acres with this parcel and that they can add 18 more acres to the property. Goodrum
stated in his opinion these items can be resolved.
Goodrum stated as it relates to the traffic,it comes down to perception,and that the actual traffic numbers
show what is happening out. In addition,in regards to height,Orono has other similar buildings three and
four stories high that have been approved,and that it comes down to someone's perception of the height.
Alex Ugorets, 175 Brentwood Road, stated he can understand why the residents are not happy about the
project since it will impact their lives. Ugorets stated any development will affect the neighborhood but
that 30 feet only allows for a two-story building with a decent ceiling height. Ugorets stated the footprint
is the way it has to be, and that if they are talking about 20 units versus 40 units,there is no way in this
day and age a building can be constructed for that few units.
Ugorets commented he also cannot think of another project that will minimize the traffic and fit all the
criteria that everybody desires. Ugorets stated he would love to accommodate everybody here,but if he
did that,it would be a parking lot,which is not going to happen. Ugorets noted an office building will
generate more traffic.
Ugorets stated the higher the building,the more people want to be on the upper floor for the views.
Ugorets stated the building they are proposing is barely making it,but what makes it feasible is to put the
penthouse up there.
Ugorets requested the Planning Commission to either deny or approve the application. If it is denied,the
City should revisit the Comprehensive Plan and guide people for something that is doable on this site and
not somebody's dream. Ugorets stated he understands the property is guided to 15 units per acre and that
they can move some property lines around to meet the density.
Ugorets stated he would like to get clear direction on whether the Planning Commission recommends
approval or denial before he spends any more money on the project. Ugorets stated the footprint and
height are in stone and that he will not redesign and come back with another project.
Ugorets stated people in single-family homes or townhouse projects do not want to live next to an office
building. Ugorets stated every time there is a multi-family building guided,it is next to a busy road,and
that they changed their proposal from an apartment building to condominiums because they thought the
residents would be happier with the condominiums
Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 8:12 p.m.
Schoenzeit stated it is clear that the intersection of County Roads 19 and 15 does not work and that 95
percent of the traffic comes from the south and the other three directions are almost empty. Schoenzeit
Page 14 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19, 2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
stated a police officer directing traffic would be far more efficient than a stoplight. Schoenzeit
encouraged the City to move this intersection up to a higher priority independent of what happens with
this property.
Chair Thiesse reopened the public hearing at 8:15 p.m.
John Frewalds noted the latest edition of Lakeshore has an article written by him regarding the traffic in
this area. Frewalds commented the Lakeshore Weekly liked his article on traffic so much he will be
doing a regular column on it. Frewalds stated a good way to look at traffic is to look at it as a glass that is
full,and then when you add two more drops,it overflows,which is where they are right now.
Frewalds noted they have had to add boulders at the cul-de-sac since GPS shows that it is a through road.
Frewalds suggested the speed limit from Shadywood down to County Road 30 be reduced.
Thiesse noted it is a county road and that only the state can change it.
Thiesse closed the public hearing at 8:16 p.m.
Thiesse stated he cannot get over the height of the building in the back. Thiesse stated in his view this
site is a condominium site and that the applicants have done a wonderful job in designing the building but
that the height is an issue for him. Thiesse stated they are looking at an RPUD,which allows for some
flexibility,but that the applicant has said he has no more flexibility.
Lemke noted the traffic will be impacted no what goes on this site so it is not as much of a factor.
Thiesse commented this is the best use for the property as it relates to traffic.
Lemke stated he also has issues with the height since it seems to be too much building for the area.
Landgraver stated the proposed use does seem to be an optimal use of the site in terms of minimizing the
traffic impact. Landgraver stated he is struggling with the height and in his view it is too much.
Landgraver commented it is unfortunate the economics do not work for a building that is not as high.
While the Planning Commission has always been sensitive to views of the lake and the visual nature of
Orono,the height of the penthouse pushes it too much.
Olson stated he is in agreement with Commissioner Landgraver and that he cannot support the project.
Schwingler indicated he also is in agreement with the other commissioners.
Schoenzeit stated when the proposed density is above what it is guided for,it shows that there is not
enough land. Schoenzeit stated the height of the building is the number one show stopper.
Schoenzeit asked if including the wetlands would help the dry buildable calculations.
Barnhart stated the City does not include the wetlands or the wetland buffer in that calculation.
Barnhart noted there is some flexibility in shifting the property line,but it raises the question of how
shifting that property line will impact setbacks. In addition,the height of the building,density,and traffic
are also other issues that have been discussed tonight.
Page 15 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Thiesse stated the City has no control over who drives on the road.
Landgraver noted the City keeps kicking the density issue down the road and that this was a constructive
approach to reaching maximum density on the site. Landgraver stated in his view the higher density helps
Orono to a certain extent.
Schwingler stated he agrees the density has to be figured out and that this was a good solution.
Lemke stated he would prefer the Planning Commission take action on this item tonight.
Thiesse stated he wishes there was more flexibility but that the applicant has indicated he cannot reduce
the size of the building.
Ugorets commented he could put in affordable housing with 500 square foot units and keep it at 30 feet.
Landgraver moved,Lemke seconded,to recommend denial of Application No. 17-3944,Westwood
Professional Services on behalf of Ugorets,8098,LLC,2520 Shadywood Road,Zoning Change and
Master Plan Review. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0.
6. UPDATE ON CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS HELD ON MAY 22,2017,AND JUNE 12,
2017
Barnhart reported on the following actions by the City Council:
• Appointed John Thiesse to the Planning Commission for a third term;
• Approved on the Consent Agenda Jim Kirkland's request for a sign;
• Approved the Orono Public Schools' request for a conditional use permit for the mechanical
building and outdoor kitchen;
• Approved Black Bear Builders' request for a generator pad;
• Approved the TC Homes application at 1325 Rest Point Lane following public comment;
• Denied Westlake Development's application for construction staging;
• Approved Orono Public Schools' request for a bus garage subject to an acceptable screening plan
and relocation of the fuel tank;
• Approved John Bailey's permit for slope restoration;
• Approved Jason Peterson's application but denied the deck variance;
• Approved the Orono Public Schools and City of Orono text amendment;
• The text amendment for small lots was approved with the setbacks being reduced to 7.5 feet and
10 feet. The City Council followed the recommendation of the Planning Commission with regard
to unimproved rights-of-way.
7. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
Barnhart introduced Laura Oakden,Orono City Planner,to the Planning Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
Page 16 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,June 19, 2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
None
ADJOURNMENT
Theisse moved,Schoenzeit seconded,to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 8:31
p.m. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0.
ATTEST:
John Thiesse,Chair
Page 17 of 17
�o vo
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members
Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator y�
l-'kESHO
From: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Development Director
Date: July 17, 2017
Subject: #17-3953, City of Orono,Text Amendment: Land Alteration
Public Hearing
Application Summary: The draft ordinance amends the regulations for non-encroachments in
the lake yard.
Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff seeks direction on the ordinance as
drafted.
Background
In March 2017,the Council enacted an ordinance that altered the regulations for retaining
walls, planters, and similar structures. The amendment allowed retaining walls, planters and
similar structures in all required yards when all of the following conditions are met:
1. The structure is located at least ten feet from the edge of the traveled roadway;
2. The structure is not located within a drainage, utility, or other easement, except
upon approval in writing for an encroachment agreement by the city; or similar
approval from another regulatory and/or utility agency;
3. The structure creates no impacts to drainage direction, rate or volume for
adjacent properties.
4. The structure is 2 (two)feet in height or less above existing grade.
Retaining walls, planters,and similar structures has been interpreted to include planter/
landscaping edging of stone,wood,and plastic, boulder fire rings, and boulder lot line
demarcation. It has been noted that residents have commonly placed these features in the lake
yard with minimal visual or hardcover impact. Retaining walls are not included in the hardcover
calculations.
If the Planning Commission or Council desires to prohibit these features, including landscape
planter edging, boulder fire rings, and similar in the 75' lake yard,then an amendment is in
order, as "all required yards" includes"lake yards". The draft ordinance in exhibit A will clarify
the issue. As with any amendment, any existing retaining walls, planters, and similar structures
are considered non-conforming, and are permitted to remain.
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A. Draft Ordinance
PC Exhibit A
17-3953
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 RETAINING WALLS, PLANTERS AND SIMILAR STRUCTURES IN
8 LAKE YARDS THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF ORONO
9
10
11 THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS:
12
13 SECTION 1. Section 78-1405(a)of the City of Orono Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended
14 to read as follows:
15 (5.1) Retaining walls, planters and similar structures, subject to the following provisions:
16 a. Retaining walls, planters and similar structures may be located in all required
17 yards except lake yards, when all of the following conditions are met:
18 1. The structure is located at least ten feet from the edge of the traveled
19 roadway;
20 2. The structure is not located within a drainage, utility, or other easement,
21 except upon approval in writing for an encroachment agreement by the city; or
22 similar approval from another regulatory and/or utility agency;
23 3. The structure creates no impacts to drainage direction, rate or volume for
24 adjacent properties.
25 4. The structure is 2 (two) feet in height or less above existing grade.
26 b. Retaining walls,planters and similar structures exceeding two feet in height
27 above existing ground level or which are located less than five feet from a side
28 property line, or are located within the lake yard, shall require a permit and upon
29 recommendation of the building official may require city council review or a
30 conditional use permit per the provisions of section 78-967.
31 c. Retaining walls, planters and similar structures exceeding the allowed height of a
32 fence shall be located so as to meet the required accessory structure setbacks
33 established for that yard.
34 d. Planters and similar structures in the lake yard are not permitted.
35
36 SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage
37 and publication.
38 ADOPTED this day of ,2017 on a vote of_ayes and_nays by the
39 City Council of Orono, Minnesota.
40
41 ATTEST:
42
43
f
44
45
46 Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor
47
48
49 Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of , 2017.
2
yt
Date Application Received: 6/27/17
Date Application Considered as Complete: 6/27/17
60-Day Review Period Expires: 10/27/17*
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members y
G.
From: Jeremy Barnhart,Community Development Director -ktsu
Date: July 17, 2017
Subject: #17-3948 Apex Holdings LLC(Sanjeev Mangalick)—2635 Kelley Parkway
- Comprehensive Plan Amendment(17-3957)
- Rezoning/Preliminary master plan(17-3958)
- Plat(17-3956)
- Conditional Use Permit(17-3948)
*The review timeline has been extended to 120 days.
Zoning District: RR-1B PUD (Guided for Office Use in 2008-2030 CMP)
Proposed Use: Senior Housing—Continuum of Care Retirement Community
Property Area: 151,234 s.f. (3.47 ac.)
Application Summary: The applicant proposes a new 70-unit, 2-story residential facility including 24
independent living, 24 assisted living, and 22 memory care units. The property is served by municipal
sewer and water. Access will be from Kelley Parkway. The proposed plan would require rezoning to
RPUD and an amendment of the comprehensive plan,converting from commercial use to residential
use. Those applications have been received. Development of the property also requires re-platting from
an Outlot to a Lot per the provisions of the Stonebay PUD No.4 Agreement.
Staff Recommendation: Staff supports the amendment of the Comprehensive Plan to High Density
Residential, Rezoning to RPUD, approval of concept master plan, approval of the Preliminary Plat,and
approval of a Conditional Use Permit as presented,subject to the following conditions:
1. Metropolitan Council Approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
2. Approval of the final Master Plan
3.Additional Easements to protect existing water and storm sewer infrastructure.
4. Approval of waivers are described.
5. The drive around the building shall be at least 20 feet wide.
6. An 8' bituminous trail shall be provided along the southern property line.
Background
This project was reviewed as a sketch plan last summer,case number 16-3854. The property under review
is Stonebay Outlot D,which is directly across Kelley Parkway from the Stonebay Lofts,at the west end of
the long stormwater pond. The property is governed as part of the Stonebay Master Development, and is
guided and planned for Commercial Office use. The site has remained vacant since Stonebay was initially
developed in 2003, and there have been no past proposals for the property. Absent any apparent market
desire for office uses in this area,coupled with the clear directives of the Orono Community Management
Plan(CMP)that retail uses should not extend west of Willow Drive,the proposed senior housing use may
be a reasonable alternative. It also has the potential to assist in meeting residential urban density goals in
order to allow continued development of Orono's sewered lakeshore areas as desired.
17-3948
July 17,2017
Page 2 of 7
The property is currently zoned RR-1B PUD,One Family Rural Residential.The intent of this zoning was
functionally a`holding' zone,with the property originally anticipated to be rezoned to B-6 PUD at the time
of approval of a specific commercial development on the site. For the proposed residential continuum of
care use,rezoning to RPUD would be most appropriate.
The property has been located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area(MUSA)since 1980,and would
be served with municipal sewer and water,for which connection charges are spelled out in the PUD No.4
Agreement.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
The property is currently guided Office. The net development density based on 48 independent and assisted
living units would be 13.8 units per acre. The proposal to re-guide the site for High Density Residential in
the defined range of 10-15 units per acre would be appropriate.
Met Council and Density. In approving Orono's 2008-2030 CMP, Met Council took into account that
Orono guided specific properties for higher density sewered development(3-7,7-10,4-15 and 10-15 units
per acre)in order to offset the long-planned sewered development at low densities in the Shoreland areas.
In effect, the higher-density guiding of a select number of strategically located properties established a
numerical `buffer' which allowed properties previously added to the MUSA and guided/planned for 2-acre
minimum lot sizes,to be developed as historically planned.
This numerical buffer has functionally been eliminated with the development of projects substantially lower
than suggested by the Comprehensive Plan,including the Orono Preserve project at 3 units per acre,(guided
7-10 units per acre)and the Eisinger Meadows project at 5.5 units per acre(guided at 10-15 units per acre).
In order to re-establish the buffer and allow sewer in areas at a density less than 3 units per acre, Orono
must re-guide additional property for higher density. In the meantime, any new proposed developments at
a density of less than 3.0 units per acre involving connection to or extension of the sewer system, will not
be approved by Met Council. Reguiding of the applicants'property for residential use at high density would
be a substantial step forward in re-establishing the necessary density buffer.
When introducing high density residential,it is appropriate to consider surrounding land uses,the access to
highways and mass transit,jobs, and services. The adjacent Stonebay Condominium has established high
density residential. Wayzata Blvd is a major transportation corridor, and the site is near the commercial
businesses and services in the northern third of the city. Bus service is not available to the area at this time.
Placing the proposed continuum of care facility adjacent to a possible future office use to the immediate
west would not be unusual,as an office use(as opposed to a retail use)would likely be compatible with the
applicants' residential proposal.
Rezoning to RPUD
To accommodate the proposed development would be rezoned to RPUD. The RPUD District standards are
found in Zoning Code Sections 78-621 thru 78-629 and attached as Exhibit G.The RPUD district standards
indicate an RPUD site must be at least 5 acres in area, but does allow for smaller sites under specific
conditions,as noted in the code excerpt below:
Sec. 78-626. - Development standards. Within the RPUD district all development shall be in
compliance with the following:
(1) Minimum area; shoreland district limitation. Each site proposed for rezoning to RPUD shall have
a minimum area of five acres, excluding areas within a designated wetland, floodplain or
shoreland district or right-of-way,unless the council finds the existence of one of the following:
a. Unusual physical features of the property itself or of the surrounding neighborhood such that
development as a RPUD will conserve a physical or topographic feature of importance to the
neighborhood or community.
17-3948
July 17,2017
Page 3of7
b. The property is directly adjacent to or across a public street from property which has
been developed previously as a RPUD or planned residential development and will be
perceived as and will function as an extension of that previously approved development.
c. The property is located in an area where the proposed development provides a transition
between a commercial or industrial area and an existing residential area or on an intermediate
or principal arterial as defined in the comprehensive plan.
(2) Uses. Each property rezoned to RPUD shall only be used for the use or uses for which the site is
designated in the comprehensive plan, except that the city may permit rezoning to RPUD on a
site designated for commercial use if the city council finds that such use is in the best interests
of the city and is consistent with the requirements of this division. If a commercial site is to
be rezoned to RPUD,the city may forward a copy of the request to the metropolitan council
for review. (emphasis added)
It would appear that the provisions of 78-626(1)b would be applicable, as the proposed use is within the
Stonebay Master Development and is directly across Kelley Parkway from the Stonebay Lofts, which are
similarly zoned RPUD. Further,because the site is guided for commercial office use with the intention of
being rezoned for commercial use,the rezoning would fit within the provisions of 78-626(2). It should be
noted that the Council has recently approved and supported two smaller RPUD developments(Shadywood
Villas and the Eisinger site)so that rezoning the Kelley Parkway parcel to RPUD would not be inconsistent.
RPUD District Minimuni Proposed lot flexibility
SFR Standard Standards Required?
Minimum project size: 5 acres 3.5 Yes
Building Setback(Kelley Parkway) 35 44 No
Building setback(Wayzata Blvd) 50 54 No
Minimum side yard setback: 35 feet 37 feet No
Maximum FAR: 1 0.52 No
Parking lot and dribving lane setback 20' 8-27 feet Yes
Private Recreational Area: 10%ofgross project area 3%proposed Yes
Building height: Maximum of 30 feet appx 32' Yes
Number of stories 3(Max) 2 No
Hardcover 50% 63% Yes
Height limitations. "For properties guided for residential use in the comprehensive plan, a building
height limit of 30 feet shall apply. For properties currently zoned or guided in the comprehensive plan
for commercial use, height may exceed 30 feet but shall not exceed three stories (not including
underground parking level) and shall maintain a residential character by incorporating pitched or
hipped roof structure."
Architecture. The Stonebay development has established a certain design characteristic. Staff suggests that
the building materials be consistent with the pattern established by the Stonebay development,and include
architectural shingles,cement/fiber boar siding,brick and/or stone. These materials should be spelled out
in the final master plan.
Conformity: The proposed conceptual site plan includes a two-story building with a defined height
estimated at 32 feet, significantly lower than the Lofts across the street, but still technically requiring
flexibility. Proposed underground parking under half of the building constitutes a 3'level. It is assumed
that some filling to raise the overall elevation of the site is likely in order to accommodate the underground
17-3948
July 17,2017
Page 4of7
parking while avoiding water table issues.
The building setbacks meet minimum RPUD standards,
Preliminary Plat
The property is currently Outlot D of Stonebay. The property must be platted to a buildable lot to allow for
development. The proposed plat, Stonebay Eighth Addition, is consistent with the master plan of the
development, and includes easements outlined in the original plat. The location of the storm water pipe
along the southern property line and the watermain along the east end (discussed below) will need to be
verified and if necessary,the easements adjusted.
Development of the property is subject to the various fees established within Exhibit M of the PUD No. 4
Agreement, all of which were deferred until a development plan is approved for each of the commercial
outlots (Outlots A& D). Below is a summary of the fees,collectible in full at the time of approval of the
final plat. These fees will be recalculated at the time of Final Plat:
Park Dedication Fee:
$3,250/unit x #of units (example: 48 units x$3,250=$156,000)
Sewer Connection Charge:
$6,330/acre x 3.5 acres=$22,155.00
Water Connection Charge:
$10,480/acre x 3.5 acres=$36,680.00
Stormwater& Drainage Trunk Fee:
Residential>4 units/acre: $8,490/ac x 3.5 acres=$29,715.00
Note that per the Agreement, the Park Fee is not adjusted for inflation, while the connection charges and
Stormwater&Drainage Trunk Fee are calculated based on the current(2017) Fee Schedule.
Conditional Use Permit
Access,Internal Circulation and Parking
The plan provides one access,from Kelley Parkway. There are no accesses onto Wayzata Blvd. The access
will line up with the exit of the Stonebay Lofts access.
Internal circulation is proposed to be provided by a paved driveway around the building. This driveway
will serve as the fire lane. The Fire Chief notes that the fire lane should be 20 feet minimum width. Portions
of the proposed drive do not meet the setback requirements of 20 feet requiring a waiver.
Parking as depicted includes 46 surface stalls and 39 underground stalls,for a total of 85 spaces. While the
Orono Zoning Code does not specify a numerical parking requirement for the continuum of care, the ITE
Parking Generation manual,4th addition suggests the need for 53-67 stalls,based on the following uses:
Independent Living: 1.0- 1.15 stalls per unit(Low rise apartment building)
Assisted Living: 0.5 stalls per unit,or 1 per 3 beds
Memory Care: 1 stall per bed
Parking appears to be sufficient.
Parks,Trails,Sidewalks
Development of the property is subject to the conditions of approval of the Stonebay PUD. No. 4
Agreement.In part the Agreement requires establishment and construction of a trail system in Outlot D.An
excerpt from the Agreement,Exhibit K,"Special Conditions", Item 1 (Transportation)reads as follows:
h) An 8' wide bituminous surfaced public pedestrian/bicycle trail shall be constructed by the
Developer or his successors in ownership within Outlots A and D along Highway 12, connecting
17-3948
July 17,2017
Page 5 of 7
to the trails constructed in Phase I. The construction of the portions of said public trail adjacent to
Highway 12 within Outlots A and D may be deferred until a determination is made whether the
Highway 12 boulevard area will be converted from a rural section to an urban section and/or until
Outlots A or D are developed for commercial uses. The trails along Highway 12 may be located
within the Highway 12 right-of-way if a 20'separation is maintained from the traveled roadway of
Highway 12, and if MnDOT approval is obtained. Portions of the trail may be located within the
right of way of Kelley Parkway north of the stormwater pond. The trail shall provide a continuous
connection along Highway 12 from the east boundary of the property to the west boundary;
connection across the stormwater pond area may be along Highway 12 or may jog up to and back
down from Kelley Parkway along the stormwater pond perimeter. The development of the
Hennepin County 112 turnback plans continues and may include a trail within the right of way. It
is recommended that a condition be added that a trail or trail connections be added, depending on
final resolution of the County'splans.
i) The City shall be responsible for maintenance of the public trails upon their completion and
acceptance. Public easements including a suitable shoulder width shall be granted over all the
public trails not located in dedicated right-of-way.
Pending a final layout of 112/ Wayzata Blvd by the county, applicants should expect that a trail will be
required, with a possible connecting link to Kelley Parkway along the west edge of the stormwater pond.
In the past,trails have been used to satisfy,in part,the park dedication requirements.
An existing sidewalk within the right-of-way of Kelley Parkway extends along the entire frontage of the
site,constructed with the original Stonebay improvements.
RPUD standards indicate the requirement for 10%of the site being dedicated to recreational purposes. The
proposed pond pavilion and perimeter bike pathway would potentially satisfy that requirement.
Development of the property is also subject to a Park Dedication Fee per the provisions of the PUD No.4
Agreement(see Development Fees Summary below).
Site Grading, Stormwater and Drainage Improvements
The long stormwater pond was originally sized to accommodate all elements of Stonebay,so that individual
ponding will not be required on this site. Because the site is so flat,the assumption is that in order to make
drainage function adequately and allow for underground parking,the site will require some amount of fill,
likely raising the main floor above the level of Kelley Parkway.
A 30"stormwater pipe is believed to be located along the southerly boundary of the property,approximately
20 feet inside the lot line, transporting runoff to the stormwater pond from the two adjacent commercial
properties to the west. An internal storm sewer system is likely to be constructed on the site which will
also discharge to the pond.
The property is not within the Stormwater Overlay District, but if developed as RPUD is subject to a
maximum hardcover per lot of 50%. The site plan indicates impervious coverage of 63% which will have
to be reduced to meet the hardcover limit,or a waiver granted.
Stormwater management will be subject to City and MCWD review and approval. The property will be
subject to the Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fee as noted above.
Utility Locations/Availability
Municipal sewer and water utilities are available in Kelley Parkway to serve the property. A City water
main line exists within the property, extending through the SE corner. A portion of the pipe appears to
extend beyond the easement,additional easements will be necessary.
The property has not been previously assessed for sewer and water. Connection charges as noted above
will be due at the time of final plat approval.
•
•
17-3948
July 17,2017
Page 6of7
Conservation Design
While the property is technically subject to the City's Conservation Design Ordinance,it is suggested that
due to the small size and open nature of the property,a Conservation Design Inventory and Master Plan is
unnecessary; Planning Commission should address this topic in its discussion.
Archaeological Site Proximity
Staff is unaware of any archaeological sites within the property; the applicant should contact the State
Historic Preservation Office(SHPO)to confirm.
Conditional Use Permit
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
maps the site for office use. The Commission is considering an amendment to the
Community Management Plan,if approved the use would be consistent.
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 rezoning to RPUD would
allow for consistency with use regulations.
3) Adequately served by police, fire,roads,and stormwater management; The property was laid
out to accommodate an office use.
4) Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system; The property is served
by municipal water and sanitary sewer
5) Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; No additional
public service costs associated with the proposed use are anticipated.
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 adjoining properties to the north are high density residential; to
the south and west are commercial.To the east across a stormwater pond is vacant,
commercial land. The proposed quasi commercial residential use appears to be
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
7) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area,unless a change of character is called for
in the community management plan;An amendment to the Community Management Plan
would allow the proposed use. 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 existing building has both commercial and residential
characteristics and its location and design make it compatible with the surrounding
residential and commercial uses.
8) 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 to
suggest otherwise.
9) Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and activities
likely to disturb surrounding uses; Adhering to the RPUD landscaping requirements will
provide for adequate screening.
10)Not create a nuisance which generates smoke,noise,glare,vibration,odors,fumes,dust,
electrical interference,general unsightliness,or other means; No evidence has been
presented to suggest otherwise.
17-3948
July 17,2017
Page 7 of 7
11) Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets,parking needs that cause a
demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties,traffic congestion,or unsafe access; No
evidence has been presented to suggest otherwise.
12) Designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area and to
minimize environmental impact; There are minimal natural,scenic features of the site.
13) 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;The site plan shows minimal measurable
light at the ground off site; and
14) Not detrimental to the public health,public safety,or general welfare. There is no evidence
that the proposed use will have detrimental effects.
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.
Summary of Issues for Consideration
The Commission should consider the following questions in reviewing the proposal:
1. Is there justification for the necessary CMP amendment and rezoning to allow the guiding of this
property to be converted from commercial office to residential? If that conversion is not allowed,
what other uses for the site might be acceptable (aside from office)? Would the City see greater
benefit by waiting for commercial development of this property,or is this the appropriate time and
location to make the change?
2. Is there sufficient justification for flexibility as requested?
3. Planning Commission should discuss whether this development should be required to create the
RPUD standard 10% private recreation space. If so, do the Pond Pavilion and surrounding yard
areas satisfy that requirement?
4. Staff recommends that a 10' trail easement be retained along the south boundary of the property.
This requirement may go away as plans for the 112/Wayzata Blvd project progress.
5. Should the Conservation design requirements be waived.
6. Are there any other issues or concerns with these applications?
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A. Application
Exhibit B. Building Plans
a. Sheet A 1.0 title Sheet&colored elevation
b. Sheet A2.1 Site Plan
c. Sheet A5.0 Exterior Elevations
d. Sheet A3.0 Lower Level Plan
e. Sheet A3.1 First Floor Plan
f. Sheet A3.2 Second Floor Plan
g. Sheet A3.3 Roof Plan
Exhibit C. Airphoto
Exhibit D. Comp Plan Map: Land Use Plan
Exhibit E. Comprehensive Plan Excerpts
Exhibit F. Stonebay PUD No.4 Excerpts
- Exhibit K—Special Conditions
- Exhibit M—Development Fees
Exhibit G. RPUD Ordinance
PC Exhibit A
17-3948 RECEIVED •
City of O t.. ,r..; ,
JUIN 2 0 2017
CITY OF ORONO
Conditional Use Perr l; .:, p ;3 , [ catiori
Street Address: . — Application#„_/ 94
r \ 2750 Kelley Parkway
7n A—vo Orono,MN 55358 Date Received: /p- -,,i4-a
Main: 952-249-4800 Staff: M�
fax 85Z-2.16-4818 Fee: $700 ,II lig_ -) p o a,5
A A4sNogAddess: Escrow: w700 I NA
11/114, 10.
` P.O.Box88t tiG Crystal Bay,MN b6323-0088 Notes:
•
lik
Please complete. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application.
Incomplete applications will not In placed on Pic..nriinr Cc,mr:i:oalon Agartuc€.
SITE LOCATION: �� (OM' , Ili., r+i`t+�,4.
^-� .t ....--_
` •��DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: rr' db+t,b1!,yk ►i _C �1 •r N, ' , a ` �''-'�iJ (- ( , � .
(attached additional shoats at;taco:uari')
APPLICANT INFORMATION: 1.�,'cI' ck here If Applicant address should be used for bilhini.1 •
Applicant: ft 4 .. _ �/`` `' r 1 .. -
���.-_.L+l,_,__- .2._.5A... 1 sir:'iwi,,,• r1r i'
Phone(Primary): _ ._,i�- r - a g� - w ,
Mailing Address: ----*.yo �" t ^" c,:..;,,t- '" Cit < r1 '',,:
_._ d! _ _ �u u;"'►. r , �.. Y �tS ZIP:
Email: `S'li', t:.V orfs' s .1k: : �.t . _1- -
PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: heck here if Property Owner is same Ds applicant
/�
O check here if Property Owner address�houid be used for billing
Name: A/e _ H€4,2>i"GS. y.. C - .5°.A-1V
64r /17,1/U67/±4._/cx
Phone(Primary): _..__.. 6/2. - -LfeTl
Mailing Address: ono Lvt ,ee Ay_e.... Sourtf, -� - C City: Ai P.LS ZIP: 5405-
Email: _ (2�^rWzf''It?)00cA 17/Pc.. C C.4,01 carr.Al 4.._
APPLICA,,cm'r AND/OR PROPERTY OWNER:
o Certify that the Information supplied Is true and correct to the best of hic/her knowledge. The applicant and xoprR
owner recognize that they are solely responsible for cutmititng a complate applicAton being aware That upon
failure to do so,the staff has no alternative but to reject It until It Is c. mplote or to eacommend .ha req'ia>=•i frc
denial of the request regardless of Its potential merit.
o The Property Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application c.nd furti mar authorizes reasonable entry onto th,3
property by City Staff,consultants,agents,Commission and Council Members.lir purposes of investigation and verification
of this request.
▪ Property Owner and/or Applicant acknowledge they must In preuent ai ail ochoc ulad review mesti.:gs of th.
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 pica,of the applicant/owner and advise the City
Planner assigned to your project.
Y Information will be distributed via email.
Applicant Signature: { /11/--4.4-L.:4- i7 tti 6- /7 -/7
Applicant Signature: ----r-- __ D3ir.
Property Owner Signature: J Date. 67`f
Property Owner Signature' uum;:
CUP Application-January 2017
Page 4
# 3 9 48
RECEIVED
__. JUN 2 0 2017
(citit-oivo-
� Crty cp k,:yCV OF ORONO
AmuPr+ - ppliCaic� ..r Wit , �i E Fc�►r lk ``
sH
-- (This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting.)
r T._ --
For Officc lUs to
City Planner: 3_ !_;�r� �.t jt: ,� .��._ Meeting i.satel'Cnnc + _ ..
PC Data:._.____...- _,_ Met with: t;$y"
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: -,,,` n
Site Address: � '-S I{G'- {��°may +, t✓ r''rc'u f fl -(
Property identification Number(PIN): -_ I
Zoning District: Size of Property: ,-1,5,i,-;,14:4_
LAND USE REQUESTS:
❑Appeal of 0 Commercial Site Li:Comprehensive Plan 1 O Easement/ROW
Administrative Decision Plan Review Amendment Vacation,
without subdivision _ J
❑ PID
0 PUD-Residential 0 RPUD,without ,>l Ordinance Amendments i
❑PUD-Commercial 1 subdivision I including Rezoning__ i,
0 Other
i
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTS:
0 Amend Existing CUP 0 Commercial/Industrial Use 0 Duplex Credit
(per bldg)
Grading and filling- ❑Grading and filing- 0 Grading and filing••with 75 feet of OHWL
i___ 501 cy or more Wetland and flood plain (includes seawalls and retainincLwa4) _
i 0 Guest House/ pt Institutional ❑ Residential 1
Guest Apartment Type: 4`c:,,t t;,�tr 1,4';v.: 0 Renewal of CUP 1 Residential Accessory Use I
___ _ __._..- --_-_. I._.ape:
Applicant's BILLS AND ESCROW: The land use application fee is for city staff time and overhead
Initials: costs only. Owner and/or Applicant shall pay for consultant expenses incurred in review of
Property this application and/or additional staff time not covered in initial application fee, as well as
Owner's provide an escrow in the amount of$, 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: _,J,,,r`•2.141- Date: _ 6 -'l 7-f
Property Owner Signature' _ :mow- Date:
/Vex Ho ��uGr, LLC
CLIP Application—January 2017
Page 3
# 3948
RECEIVED
TRANSMITTAL �roo
JUN 2 0 2017 wesnd Professional Seri/kiss
7699 Anagram Drive
Coen Prairie,MN 55344
CITY OF ORONO YARN 952.937-5150
FAx 952-937.5822
TOLL FML 1-888-937-5150
EMAIL wpsawestwoodps.[om
Date: June 20,2017 vvswlrwestwoodps.tom
Westwood Re: Orono Senior Housing
File 0011740.00
To: Jeremy Barnhart
City of Orono
2750 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356
From: Ryan Bluhm
Items: No Description
2 Full Size copies of the Preliminary Plans, Architectural Plans and
Final Plat
1 Application and Fee
1 Mailing labels
1 Reduce Plan set
Purpose: For your approval
Remarks: Jeremy,
Attached is our application for a conditional use permit for a senior living
facility at 2635 Kelley Parkway. I will also send you an email with a link to
our cloud which will have digital copies of all our plan information.
Please give me a call at 952-906-7432 with any questions.
Delivery: Messenger - 3 hr
cc: File,
TWIN CUES/METRO ST.CLOUD BRAINEND 4 39 48
' Gori and Associates
The complete architectural support solutio n
Orono CCRC
(Continuum of Care Retirement Community)
Project Summary:
Project Location:
This proposed project is located at 2635 Kelley Parkway,Orono,Minnesota.The south property line of
the site fronts Wayzata Boulevard West.
Project Description:
The CCRC at 2635 Kelley Parkway is a 70 unit,2 story facility,comprising of 24 Independent Living,
24 assisted living and 22 memory care units.
Total site area: 151,234 sf: 3.47 acres
Building footprint: 39,976 sf
Total building area: 72,112 sf
Number of stories:2
Building height: (measured from I"floor level to the midpoint of the roof slope): 31'-0"(Approx)
Density requested: 15 units/acre=52 units. (The density calculation has been applied to the
Independent and Assisted Living units only)
Number of units requested:48(24 IL+24 AL units)and 22 Memory Care units
Amenities include the following:
1) Dedicated Dining Rooms for Independent Living(IL),Assisted Living(AL)and Memory Care
(MC)residents
2) Dedicated activity rooms for IL, AL and MC residents.
3) Movie Room common to IL and AL residents
4) Beauty Salon/Spa common to IL and AL residents
5) Daily structured social activities
6) Enclosed outdoor patio for MC residents
7) Landscaped garden for IL and AL residents
8) Pub/Cards/Billiards room
9) Fitness room with hydrotherapy
10)Rooftop patio with great views of Wayzata Boulevard West.
11)Lower level conditioned parking spaces for Independent units: I stall/unit(minimum)
12)Picnic Pavilion.This pavilion is for use by the neighbors as well.
Conclusion:
Senior Care and housing will face an acute shortage for the next 20 years.Additionally,this project
type is the least intrusive with regard to parking requirements and noise levels.Furthermore,the
building is built to an I-1 occupancy(Assisted Living)which requires the incorporation of more
stringent building codes as opposed to a standard apartment building.Therefore,this project would
provide a higher level of security for its residents and the neighborhood as a whole and enhance the
property value of the adjacent buildings.
4633 l''avenue south,Minneapolis,MN 55419 RECE1JVED
Tel:612-232-9539 Fax:651-305-6884
vireni<%gori-associates.00m JUN 2 0 2011
"w.gori-associates.com
# 398 CITY OF ORONO
ORONO SENIOR HOUSING COMMUNITY, SC��^
PC I xhibit B GN
PACKAGE
ORONO, MINNESOTA 17 19,18 06/15P7
R.rl.Ien.:
Consullsrds
•
T1
s yrs ae. N
I♦ , . r. �•. §+� ._.i .b _ ,' ' _ ° .. 'its _ _ �- 7
It
y `
x°
.
Q
I▪ E-— -
!
i
Orono Senior HousingCommunity,
GORI&ASSOCIATES I�r I 1 t
�� ,, AroMbeet
Orono,Minnesota �" �'~1111/141.
M nin zv°ms pm)ssaaw emaucua1ea
«f.t.MOa�..�r� mempikkomendie
aauw.u.an
Etna
+MOs+•••r.u+
rpdrarar
RECEIVED `a` '-a'-'_.
JUN zozo» 11.11,0
1,1.
# 394 8 CITY OF ORONOvhA 1 Q'-a i 0
— --
o m n ..._.- e7oseuuI�ry'0u070
..1'"—it-
1' - �-ti-
Uo<8I I Iiunwwoo -",.-F.-.1.7.4%11-4:• @'A 7L ci
N a 9 Buisnoy ao!ueg ouoap _ . i Q
ONOd NOLLN313N 0NOSIX3 -0 101100 pa
".,r,
r
/ / + _- ------1 co " 1
' » ii '4 II
/ / I f ,ge 'a " - �:o
iP
/
01Y• i
I
w.._ J
i .,, :
'
,, _ 5"Y
/ pp IV 1 § E -0�; 3 i°
/ 4� ax ..� Z $ �wb N<o k V ab
/ IS :+ 'mayJ y$` ,i—_- a Z , mgr! €,= or
I 8k,s
/ / E Ai. s 1...1.11174.-itil i
nLI 2
0 ` t
1r/to,. Nal is VIM atifit OfOr A ,
t- W i io
1 I aro. _— a "m
1 I { '' ��� iiw '` "I m
i r'
'- . ' `•
'T :i f
-�
Y e i' > N eG
f
,1 II @a@d o LV o d
„ ; j 5 < V N IL
O
h ii1 r rg I i 41. J IA Y
-:_-k.: -. II411111 Ir m 1e UMIF �a 7
r!�7 IIII a
1111tir - If ,
III_ �� V6
1 � ]I ]I K ]I •<K
■'1041
-.- AIIlir IIM,
7++:�`1t 71+�'��`K �' 1 ``It__ I++:``Ic ]I+�`Ic ]I+= .*ii,
It
]T• c 40,!'4P, ]4 ]T.Tc • +c -T Sc
1a:J
`+ 1•
. -- to %vm nu
_— - — -- —
Of1d-90 03NOZ 311S 1N33VrOV
WWI.•cv
F x wawuln'0U0.1(;) ..— Pill 11 1 o.1.
ry
, 0
"mag BulsnoH ioiueS ouoJO 4 `� 11 ? i ,2 1 Q g
—v a
a
t..-P-+I--J-..i y_—,1.9—ti-A-A----A-.II ,
O
$$
kiF1''41'11 II I ! > Q
O CO
N
,;1111,;L 1�' ifi o 0
N C
!jl:::a, U O NU z O
it
bl i'i•F'
Ilii,,L0 l!!F. I Iffl
.,,II ?ill :::II
,,i:',;.'.. Iii•. I�ullllll S:
i ll'.I•I! ,..,:1,1,,,..,
btl„I = t.
d uuu • Ia / III •i 1
Ef It I i..` 4:::-I 'ilnil
IIII I 1 Ili••
I.• I.IIIII I' �i 'll—I 1
g .::: Rg' ri I 1l .I..
1,n1III` itl .I IIIIIIIN'' I'I -111111111' AI A-�A.0#A-AI
(I_I Ia ::::I� I!:. I I::::I'I b:;'i b; agl SI I QQ�I
IIIII�1; illllllll iN., I 9:”
•• nlllllll t I:: I l
It �I� Iflll I Iilli 1 Ii'1',1,7,
ill11Y I: 111111111,I' "I!':i
II IIII l:illlll!.1j.1
na, ix.,; I.: l::::::l \ 1147F 'I',1111
m■.. r L'lli'd,
a , )FIIIII l'I IG Fl.'ll';'1:1'1;71.111';'
I ',i ii i
uu
un
aII •'E 11:::::: I YI'111 Il iiia
� 1111
Illllllly 'i •S .AAAIIII .j !• I n I - Ili■u■
iI' I II Iii 7: ilii li7 III I1,
I• II111111 r. 11:
1 I I PI I III I IIIIIIII;
°'Ij luumirj _��"� IN
�llllllllij�;i
=• I , 11111111
l Ilnl
nllllnl.I / �'
III:' 111
Ad, I• -inns 11 17I.
,II_I =1� 'q1.
(VIII�I ° I I
• I .• I lit• ( :` _ II Fi Y.I I 1'1 ;
I lunm` `11 N '3 ••
I, iii m iliiii j m!....I.:,-,1 II i I. 11.
p '.1111„,,.:,
,,�PF t Ij I ,1 _ I II
1 �1�III HL I Iwui''i ''''`4'11' I y.
c 111111111j „il fr.l ,1� Il1Il ,. "H i,'I
I.
I l'�I iI _ II �I ,III IIII
-• 111111 .�I ILII ' § t: 1I I::: III 11
t I
i '1,.,.1.,1,„:),1
1.” I I 5 •t II I!i l b
Z
Illi 1:::: 1111::::;:;
•II IIIIL'It _ ■, 17.11.•-11 Q , 'I �i 'lhI • •�.I ZO
'I I Ig
° 1.41 IIII %:•: l• F�: -• j'. 'IJIM �ppN 1 tlillE &Ifl�4 it•I,i I/ I :: t I• f
•• flnluii� i I I1 , iliilili1lQ
i Ij s-sl- -rs-- -A-.n III r;
inn 1
IIllil' b IIIIIIII,
I0 x F
a . - z
I w :If
Q
�I.Inln .{ w
... ��' !''a w 'j: W
i II`t O 1 i 7
111 Z 2 e
I1 I.• IJJIIII', I 1r1 m,,,.. i`y �1�
'4411. •VsVIC.41 F S
U W moseuum'ouru0 .•K �i L r
�vfx • /t;�unwwoJ '"'.'.w_ ig s4 ; a
wwvC „, '"% y. M
ti
"ca 8 I S 1 I 1 BuisnoH JoIuag ouoao "....,-,..t.:=' g& ;1 E s 1 a
— w
i
1 — -
/ / S
/ 1 ,---4.77---•••-..„, I OD
i/ �/
,/ I �.i���
1itv,lik'
-PAIN, fro Obi.",/ ,/
m '
i ,.til b' g'.
/
rr / _ �l, s g, 1 a� W r
/ �I ,,, •'I R 't f • `fA+. , v c�'v yam_
CS
r r �' iIZ t i t_
1 • — W
r I \� R—
1
i i 5.1 [ r J In 1
Ig
I ® a
I I � -
A
II CJI II • I
II - ` vf,,..:1.. .•it . - -N� X — 1
I �� : I
-- 1 — 1 c
r R :••,
/F.
1
I ��� \\\\\\\\\\\ I N R
--- 1 -- P
1 5i
I
I
I ;
I -
I Le 1,
' i/` fi'—, r ,
isAti r_i,,,,
I
i
wI I -- aI I
W
4m
I k
I j-
,
I
_,/,'
I I
I L-- —
I I ---i r-- it
I,+q;- D HO,3W,eD /IfOl IHi1
I :�. ,---- --_—
----1
••••,..s I
I 71. in-i n.K 11 �i•:K Et' 71 r....,lK , , t',� �I...�-K lilt:
d 1111111■
�III�1■ . •. L 1
A;, , ��;Kli:K KS: .Ni UK
T l*. .6II*.IP.1 Ali^ ic
Xon I" 11= 1ill i I IL
1—a
4_ iiiii+
i
I Iii
e11 s
— . g
A A 1il �
f ° La
11111
Ifilli I —
_
r Z Ilk • as.ii ;i` 1 1
' .�� �Illlflli iFlt I 1
itslar. -- Ulllll■ � 1
■11111=
,,
tJSVso Mo §
----- -- - ----- -- elosauulW-'cualp --'— '.1"--11:........
Ti+P'"wh ..« A - ep N
"1,5' . .. i �S}iunwwo3 #� �Y �,;
yeas` 1 cl BuisnoH Joivag ouoJo "° - a 2t. 1 Y I < g
/ /
/
/ 00
� /�
/ ) .a. �I
/ , 1
/ / . ,A 6.rt..
I r oe� , N
I I pyoU z •
I � •I -• _P1.R *
- _ "
i I mis:.7-.,„, ai,,,,„,:43.0[.
I yin !
x
1,, wise! ._,,,. „iip...._ i ,,erg-ii, 5viipt
1 / .
ru'
i I wl pier .-
7 L.,,=,.
, , .....,
, 1 wiliki.,„„„6. .4,2„.„•., ,
I j .',i IIIIIi �yty
4;*',--).' t . i X17 I.
r
. .. �
. . ••,_ mir Alhil ':. !
um. now I
1 mit.2..- 1 §:iiiiiiit::::KSK:i
!.....1...:....:.1...:.......:....:.3......t.: ,
. ..
ai41
IIj[ 1
- 'Iv
ver
I
kph ,�
- �� . .
%rd.:Mb:"-';V alp: I i
on
iF1-2.,).,
r
`3i
, , f-'V1..'-.Ji tilililt..7 -- _N0 W INt'Awt'_: h.l1A.:
-_� l111111111
�`� • .: fi ::
.mac .. � ' =wki ,,
__ I
a< -- e°osauu ouap ;t F r i h M
` i 1
-� € L iiunwwo3 .1 fly a 1 ri
1I
u 'y 1 $ulsnoH Joivag 0U040 { i
u*
•.,--
7-
/ -- —
�I , — — ---- — __ Co
i/ �-
i o' O'
I I Iso: M
'/ / or Awl .4111P7
WI" WO
% o z
! S' Ij o 0
0 0
s., Wa� ,:am '
J I/ �! IC' f�•e• V
] i
1 i1
I !/ li , , ___
4 J.'-- //d I 7-I'
I
I
I I 1 '
I 1 1> <f 1 I
t \‘ g it
, i $4.1-;,?...,..... . . --; __›-
1 � I
- , , hit
I
E. 1 -•
I i'i'i':•........
ir
_ /h- • _ .•AJ...•
4 3:40.41.VA
JJJy:
1,'1
bb 1
2& I
_— _— 1 EAL-
.
i
1
WPM �J
I
r ` 2
j , , �ss ��
11 4,..ii,.. .,
1r..-- I
< I
1 L.
1
L_ __ _J rJ
..1_
rp I �►
CONNECTEXPLoRER' ®:a m U ••• Q N PC Exhibit C
l .ws
z�c " ,T,;---,10 h � Stili — 06,_ a> ".< "41q « , - — ,
ti arm s ify =� ;y1 4r � f S,�
T
'�. - 'g .,�,., w��sees4, r.�z_f""°". - a; ...+.. .. • _• tom"
, = ........--&-.. ---- „....._ -.........77r,_. -,;0!"-._ t - ... - /e.
_ -
r
K -e ,L .�r''4.. 'mss �. ,. _ .. _ -
9 it.
aRa
_ Y_Y -� -,
�y�
`.
e.T� y 1,,y,' Y J " • .. d « } �
`+511 i, `
. • r-
01Fa.
i - q'' p ` :'
/ It n � ti - t•: 1 .te `
'.."4
_ !
-
aw,� _'!fix :.�" .+_...
ri��
_. _ ._ ._....,� Via.. �.
Ott 1'ir.L„Nary
17.1311. t
map;Auto- 04/17/2015(2015)- < image 1 of 6 >
m ® c-
PC Exhibit D
ji"PCIIII
.44
�' r ' #.74.
` :_;', ', l� L----.„.........// 2030 Land Use Plan
nIII —� - _.��.�+ �
b: .. j1-.4',' ,"' N B City of Orono
1 _ Minnesota
•
II f,'.f
rt Future Land Use Categories
• $t.:� ''
•. _Rural(1 unit/5 ac)
II i '�• :the, ;.. t -'' _Rural Residential(1 unit/2 ac)
II ;Ift, ► „,,•,',4 _. ,,,�� �! 47. I I Low Density Residential(0.5-2 units/ac)
ii
.7 iiiiimmir. LowMedfum Density Residential(2-3 units/ac)
� Medium Density Residential(3 7 units/ac)
''ry - !a / Medium-High Density Residential(7-10 units/ac)
�u.gIn
r - ��► 1._y t41; r1 _ i !High Density Residential(10-15 units/ac)
i• u i', `- �,, llai:f. sa■•-s_'1WW "N::` \\ i♦Mixed Use Residentlal(61Sunits/ac)
' , '\4 ' �/, .' §2. t�4r- w , .."%�� .; f r t �• Commercial
/ v '
1 �I�a j= -7.r ' ��� ,•1' r ''�5« \ (_JOIOce
y� �'••� 1w\ p'��� ;k Industrial
.:-,.„,<-•�-f '"I�. --��i :11- �� .7.,: ` -Park.Recreational.and Open Space
• "' a• o.' a� �/ ' 4 \ -Institutional
y�,•,• l - a A� •, ar^ .Proposed MUSA
" ' A , 1,,,I.-
.p .. i�fl ` s. � 4.. \ :7:. Open Water
a� iri. F,�•! a k �,#„� !•Parcel
vi
ilk-.,\• fr
..k ,5-,"' 99 �I .. - - w i". r �.” ;a' r t Railroad
- '.� Sx` .,�''+.`�' ii, City Limits
S A�
, -7,4 -,,, ._.,.„,,,,,_:-... ,
rt
le 111111
"7,,R<•,,,,,,v, .,..
��', � '
i. :0;..,,,,
•�, .r..r..rnrvr..r..I
PC Exhibit E
CMP Part 3B. Land Use Plan
1. All dwelling units shall be contained within a single residential building that shall not exceed two(2)
stories in height and have a footprint of no greater than 30,000 square feet.
2. The residential building shall maintain a low-profile and be designed in a residential architectural style
that blends with the natural surroundings of the site.
3. The development shall be subject to the PUD development process, and shall be rezoned to RPUD
Residential Planned Unit Development. The entirety of the property shall be so developed as a single
PUD project.
4. The development shall be served with municipal sewer and water.
5. The development shall adhere to all regulations of the City with respect to wetland protection.
6. The development shall adhere to the principals of Conservation Design as established through the Orono
Rural Oasis visioning process.
7. Site development shall be designed and constructed in such a manner that projects a rural character as
viewed from Wayzata Boulevard as motorists enter the cities of Orono and Long Lake from the east.
8. Site development shall be designed and constructed in such a manner that minimizes the visual impact
of density as viewed from the Luce Line Trail. •
9. Site vehicular access shall be via a single connection to Wayzata Boulevard. j
*The above tables correspond with Map 3B-7.
URBAN COMMERCIAL LAND USE
Urban commercial development is limited to two areas which are provided with
all the necessary urban services and facilities.
NAVARRE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. The major commercial center of Orono
will continue to be the crossroads center of Navarre. This area will provide
sufficient opportunity for neighborhood retail and service businesses, plus
adequate professional offices, to serve the needs of most Orono residents.
Accessory functions such as offices and owner-occupied living units or limited
multi-family developments will be considered appropriate in or near the Navarre
commercial area. The scale and type of retail uses in a pedestrian-friendly
environment is the most important development parameter for the Navarre
commercial area. The City will encourage redevelopment of individual
commercial sites in Navarre to allow for an expanded range of neighborhood
services and local small business opportunities.
The Navarre Commercial District extends along either side of Shoreline Drive
from the intersection of County Roads 15 and 19 westward to the Orono-Spring
Park border, and along both sides of Shadywood Road from Lyric Avenue to
Lydiard Avenue. The commercial uses along these intersecting corridors are
typically only one tier deep, with virtually all commercial properties abutting
either Shoreline Drive or Shadywood Road. Additionally, the commercial
City of Orono Community Management Plan 2008-2030 Page 3B-37
CMP Part 3B. Land Use Plan
properties are not continuous, with residential properties scattered among them,
making for a somewhat fragmented business district that is spread out over a mile
in length from end to end. Along these two corridors the second tier of
development is typically residential; hence the business uses in many cases are in
close proximity to individual homes.
Past City planning efforts for the Navarre area have identified a number of
challenges to be addressed as Navarre redevelops in the years to come:
1) High traffic volumes and the existing traffic management infrastructure
result in poor pedestrian accessibility. Pedestrians have limited options
for crossing CR 15 or CR 19. The Park and Ride facility location and
inflexibility of bus routes (partially due to the location and configuration
of the P&R lot)requires that bus patrons cross CR 15 on at least one leg of
their commute.
2) Parking availability is a limiting factor for expansion or redevelopment of
existing businesses.
3) Beautification efforts are hindered by road width and right-of-way
constraints as well as fmancial constraints.
4) Aging buildings are ripe for redevelopment yet provide Iow rental rates
that allow local businesses to survive and thrive, reducing the incentive to
redevelop.
5) There is little architectural cohesiveness among the existing buildings.
Navarre hasn't decided whether it wants to be urban (buildings against the
street, parking in the rear) or suburban(buildings set back, parking at the
front)in character.
6) Compatibility of certain business uses with the closely adjacent residential
neighborhood can become an issue.
7) Expansion of pedestrian connectivity to adjoining neighborhoods and to
Dakota Rail Trail.
8) Introduction of higher density mixed use (residential and commercial)
development to select sites identified in the Land Use Plan.
ORONO/LONG LAKE COMMERCIAL AREA. An additional commercial area
is designated along Old Highway 12 (Wayzata Boulevard) where the availability
of transportation and utilities as well as proximity to similar commercial
developments in Orono and Long Lake,make commercial use appropriate.
City of Orono Community Management Plan 2008-2030 Page 3B-38
CMP Part 3B. Land Use Plan
Orono will coordinate its commercial development planning related to Wayzata
Boulevard area with the City of Long Lake to ensure the Long Lake downtown
area remains vital and viable, to focus retail development in a compact downtown
retail area, and to prevent the extension of retail development west of Willow
Drive in Orono.
The retail development in the Wayzata Boulevard area will be community or
neighborhood scale rather than 'big box' regional scale development. The types
of retail uses will be those that focus on providing services to the residents and
businesses of Long Lake and Orono, while also drawing from the reduced traffic
stream on Wayzata Boulevard resulting from opening of the new Highway 12
corridor. However, the retail development is not to draw substantial traffic from
beyond Orono.
The development plans for the Highway 12 area will encourage locally-owned
and operated businesses that provide services to Orono and Long Lake residents.
Additionally, the Highway 12 retail area will be a pedestrian-friendly area. This
involves providing trails/sidewalks along the roadways providing access to the
retail uses. It also involves providing public amenities that provide a sense of
place and provide a gathering place for the public.
The commercial areas along Wayzata Boulevard within Orono are identified in
Map 3B-7 and include the following:
1. Property abutting the north side of Wayzata Boulevard from Brown
Road North to Willow Drive. This area was reviewed as part of
Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 in 1989, resulting in a guide plan
calling for commercial uses abutting Wayzata Boulevard with primary
access to a service road connecting from Brown Road to Willow Drive,
and elimination of direct access to Highway 12. The area is currently
bounded on the north by existing residential development at densities
ranging from 1 unit per 2 acres to 1 unit per 1.3 acres.
The western half of this area has since been developed via PUD as a
nursery/garden center with included leasable commercial spaces. The east
half of this area includes, a 10,000 s.f. office building, a strip shopping
center, a small quasi-industrial machine shop operation, an office-
condominium development, and a 62-unit senior independent living
apartment building.
The City Council in February 1998 adopted a General Concept Plan for
development along Wayzata Boulevard indicating that the Council's vision
includes community scale retail development (as opposed to regional or
'big box' scale development) focused in a more compact area in or near
downtown Long Lake (closer to Brown Road than to Willow Drive, at
least in the short term) for the following reasons:
City of Orono Community Management Plan 2008-2030 Page 3B-39
CMP Part 3B. Land Use Plan
1. Focuses on downtown Long Lake remaining a strong retail area,
and helps preserve owner-operated small service businesses in
Long Lake which are vital to Orono and Long Lake residents.
2. Focuses on maintaining a vital downtown and "sense of place" for
both Long Lake and Orono.
3. A compact retail area encourages pedestrian activity.
4. It is easier to plan, coordinate and control the development of a
more compact retail area than an extended retail strip.
5. Focusing development toward Brown Road could strengthen the
ability to obtain desirable development on the north side of
Wayzata Boulevard east of the Otten Brothers Nursery.
6. Enables better control over the amount of retail development that
occurs along Wayzata Boulevard.
7. Provides the opportunity to generate stable jobs in office, high
tech,medical,etc.
8. A more compact community scale retail area matches the design of
new Highway 12 with no interchanges through Long Lake.
9. Limits the impact on north/south roadways (i.e. increased traffic
and activity levels) as compared to the more intense "big box"
retail uses.
10. Maintains a lower activity level in the area west of Willow Drive.
11. Would create less pressure for providing an access from new
Highway 12 to the retail area.
Orono's 2000-2020 CMP reguided the easterly 4 acres of this area to
allow for development of senior housing. The remainder of this area
should be developed with a mix of commercial uses including retail,
service and office components. Access via a service road paralleling
Wayzata Boulevard is still desirable rather than direct access to Wayzata
Boulevard, since traffic levels are expected to again creep upward, and the
long-term need for a service road may again manifest itself. For this
reason,it is in the best interests of the City and the business community to
preserve at least a partial service road corridor between Brown Road and
Willow for future use which will provide all properties with access options
other than direct access from Wayzata Boulevard. The City supports the
City of Orono Community Management Plan 2008-2030 Page 3B-40
CMP Part 3B. Land'Use Plan
development of a "mid-point" connection to Wayzata Boulevard directly
across from Brimhall Avenue or Shaughnessy Avenue, such access to be
at least a right-in,right-out configuration. Further, if and when the service
road is constructed, all other existing accesses directly to Highway 12
should ultimately be removed.
2. Property abutting the north side of Highway 12 from Willow Drive to
Old Crystal Bay Road. As part of the 1989 Comprehensive Plan
amendment, the City guided the portion of this area directly adjacent to
the north side of Highway 12 for commercial development. At that time,
the City was not clear about the type of commercial development that
should be planned for this area. The 2000-2020 CMP further refined the
intent for this area, establishing that the optimum development in this area
would be office development. Office development can provide services for
Orono residents, can provide facilities for businesses owned by Orono
residents, and can provide quality employment opportunities. The
development of this area for office use versus retail use enables the
Wayzata Boulevard retail area to remain a more compact pedestrian-
friendly retail area versus a non-cohesive extended strip of retail
development. The City's intent is to have a single tier of office uses
between Kelley Parkway and Wayzata Boulevard, with residential uses
north of Kelley Parkway.
Parameters for commercial use of this area are as follows:
1. The area affected is property lying between Kelley Parkway and
Wayzata Boulevard, west of Willow Drive and east of Old Crystal
Bay Road.
2. Allowed uses in this area include professional offices, limited
service uses, and retail uses accessory to the office use.
3. Access to all uses will be via Kelley Parkway. Direct access to
Willow Drive, if allowed, shall be right-in/right-out only. There
shall be no direct access points onto Wayzata Boulevard.
4. "Big box"retail uses will not be allowed within this area.
LAKESHORE COMMERCIAL LAND USE
Lake access and lake user service businesses are appropriate for a lakeside
community and require a lakeshore location. Special performance standards are
necessary to assure protection of the lake environment and protection of
neighboring properties.
City of Orono Community Management Plan 2008-2030 Page 3B-41
PC Exhibit F
PUB NO.4 AGREEMENT EXHIBIT K
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
1. Transportation
a) Kelley Parkway shall be platted and constructed by the Developer as a two-lane public
roadway with appropriate turn lanes per the design and specifications as shown on the
approved design,Sheets C4.11 and C4.12. Appropriate traffic control and parking signage
on Kelley Parkway shall be installed by the developer subject to the City Engineer's review
and approval. Developer shall also be responsible for construction of public road
improvements to Willow Drive as shown on Sheets C4.20 and C4.21. The City Engineer
shall inspect all road construction at the appropriate stages to ensure specifications are met.
The Developer shall provide a 24-month warranty on all street construction including
utilities,sidewalks,landscaping and lighting.
b) On-street parking will be allowed on the north side of Kelley Parkway only, within the 8'
parallel parking`bump-outs' as indicated on the approved Plans. The final road design shall
ensure ease of maintenance for snow removal.
c) The interior street system and sidewalks within the common areas of the residential portion
of the development shall be privately owned and maintained,with the exception of the Public
Trail located along Willow Drive. The appropriate City standard private street and utility
easements shall be required over all streets and utilities within the common areas.
Maintenance of the private streets and sidewalks will be the responsibility of the Developer
or an incorporated homeowners association.
d) The interior road system shall be constructed per the specifications as shown on the approved
plans, Sheets C4.13 through C4.19. Appropriate traffic control signage for all interior
streets shall be installed by the developer subject to approval of the City Engineer. There
shall be no parking on interior streets except at designated parking areas.
e) The emergency-use-only connection between the Sandstone Lane cul-de-sac loop and Kelley
Parkway shall be constructed,maintained and signed to ensure emergency vehicle access is
maintained in all seasons while physically prohibiting general traffic use. Final design shall
be subject to approval by the City Engineer.
f) An 8'wide bituminous surfaced public pedestrian/bicycle trail shall be constructed by the
Developer within Outlots B,C,H and Lot 46,Block 1 in a curvilinear fashion as depicted on
Sheet C2.1. This trail system shall be constructed in conjunction with Phase I of the
development.
g) An 8' wide bituminous surfaced public pedestrian/bicycle trail shall be constructed by the
Developer within Outlot A along Willow Drive in conjunction with Phase 1 of the
development to ensure that the area designated for trail use is not commercially developed.
Page 1 of 4
h) An 8'wide bituminous surfaced public pedestrian/bicycle trail shall be constructed by the
Developer or his successors in ownership within Outlots A and D along Highway 12,
connecting to the trails constructed in Phase I. The construction of the portions of said public
trail adjacent to Highway 12 within Outlots A and D maybe deferred until a determination is
made whether the Highway 12 boulevard area will be converted from a rural section to an
urban section and/or until Outlots A or D are developed for commercial uses. The trails
along Highway 12 may be located within the Highway 12 right-of-way if a 20'separation is
maintained from the traveled roadway of Highway 12,and if MnDOT approval is obtained.
Portions of the trail may be located within the right of way of Kelley Parkway north of the
stormwater pond. The trail shall provide a continuous connection along Highway 12 from
the east boundary of the property to the west boundary; connection across the stormwater
pond area may be along Highway 12 or may jog up to and back down from Kelley Parkway
along the stormwater pond perimeter.
i) The City shall be responsible for maintenance of the public trails upon their completion and
acceptance. Public easements including a suitable shoulder width shall be granted over all
the public trails not located in dedicated right-of-way.
j) Sidewalks along both sides of Kelley Parkway shall be provided by the developer as depicted
on the approved plan sheets,including 5'concrete sidewalks separated from back of curb by
8'to accommodate deciduous trees and landscaping in boulevard.
k) All trails and sidewalks,whether public or private,shall be installed concurrently with the
residential development phases and prior to occupancy of residential units.
1) Maintenance of the sidewalks within the right-of-way of Kelley Parkway shall be the
responsibility of the Developer or the homeowners association or commercial maintenance
association.
2. Utilities and Stormwater Management
a) Developer shall construct municipal sewer and waterlines as shown on Sheets C4.1 through
C4.10, subject to final design detail approval by the City Engineer. The Developer shall
provide a L4-month warranty on all utility construction.
b) The City will own and maintain the sanitary sewer and water mains within the development.
The City will inspect these systems during their construction to ensure proper installation.
Developer shall grant Drainage and Utility Easements to the City of Orono over all municipal
sewer and water lines and facilities,including the rights of way necessary to maintain same.
c) Applicants' architect shall submit final development plans to the Metropolitan Council
Environmental Services to determine the exact number of SAC units to be charged at the
time of the issuance of building permits.
d) Developer shall construct stormwater management facilities as shown on the approved plans,
Sheets C4.11 through C4.21. The stormwater drainage system outside of public rights-of-
way will be owned and maintained by the homeowners association.
Page 2 of 4
e) Developer shall construct a regional stormwater pond within Outlots B and C and within the
.MnDOT right-of-way per the designs and specifications as shown on Sheet C3.2,subject to
Developer obtaining the appropriate permits for such use from MnDOT. The regional pond
is intended to accommodate stounwater runoff from the development as well as for the entire
upstream watershed. The regional stormwater pond shall be maintained by the Developer
during all phases of development,after which the StoneBay Comm-unity Association shall be
responsible for maintenance. In the event that MnDOT approvals require that the City be
responsible for maintenance of the regional stonnwater pond,the aforesaid Association shall
accept the financial obligation for such maintenance.
f) Developer shall provide record plan sets for all utility construction in a timely manner as
required by the PUD No. 4 Agreement.
3. Wetland Impacts
a) Orono's 26' wetland setback requirement (Zoning Code Section 10.55, Subd. 8) which
disallows filling, grading, dredging, excavation, hardcover, temporary or permanent
structures,obstructions, septic systems,wells or other construction,is in effect on the site.
Final grading and site plans, Sheets C3.1 through C3.8, indicate those locations where
grading or filling within the 26'setback is necessary to accomplish the Plan.
b) A variance to Section 10.55,Subd. 8 has been granted to allow the minimal filling within the
26'wetland setbacks where buildings abut the 26'setback line as shown on the approved plan
sheets. A wetland setback variance has been granted for encroachment of buildings,
retaining walls,roadways,trails and hardcover within the 26'wetland setback as depicted on
Sheets C3.1 through C3.8.
c) The City specifically acknowledges that 1.05 acres of City protected wetland are to be filled
or otherwise impacted as part of the project. The Developer shall comply with all specified
requirements of the MCWD in regards to mitigation and protection of wetlands on the site.
4. Grading,Erosion Control
a) Erosion control shall adhere to"Best Management Practices for Protecting Water Quality in
Urban Areas".
b) The Developer shall comply with all conditions enumerated in the Erosion Control memo by
Bonestroo&Associates dated October 3,2002.
c) All erosion control measures as required by the City and the MCWD shall be in place,
inspected and approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing excavation on the site.
d) All such erosion control measures shall be maintained in working order prior to,during and
after the project: until released by the City Engineer, subject to weekly inspection or as
necessary until the site is revegetated.
Page 3 of 4
e) Due to the Phasing of the project and the resultant lengthy period of time the site will be
under construction,the Developer shall as a condition of the PUD No.4 Agreement provide
an escrow(amount to be determined)to cover the inspection costs of ongoing erosion control
inspections.
f) The Developer shall obtain all necessary permits (including but not limited to NPDES,
MCWD and MnDCT permits) from the appropriate agencies for erosion control prior to
commencing excavation on the site.
g) In the event that the Developer's NPDES permit requires a Best Management Practices Plan,
such plan shall be submitted to the City prior to commencing excavation on the site.
h) The construction limits shall be clearly marked with adequate fencing to prevent any
construction damage or disturbance of any trees and vegetation outside of the construction
limits area. Prior to commencing excavation on the site,Developer shall identify trees to be
preserved, shall mark them on a site plan, and shall take extraordinary measures such as
fencing,signage,etc. to ensure they are not disturbed.
S. Other General Conditions
a) Monument signs as depicted in Sheets L7.1 and others maybe provided by the developer at
each entrance to the RPUD development site. The signage shall be limited to a development
name and/or logo and street address on the monument signs. Any changes to the final
design/materials of monument signage from those shown on the approved plans shall be
subject to approval by the City Council.
b) Any design,material or specification revisions from the approved plans involving streets,
utilities,stogy sewer facilities,grading or the regional pond shall be subject to approval by
the City Engineer prior to implementation of such changes.
c) Any design,material or specification revisions from the approved plans involving dwelling
unit design guidelines, architectural styles,building location, site landscaping, and other
approved/required site amenities,shall be subject to approval by the Planning Director and
may be subject to review and approval by the City Council at the discretion of the Planning
Director.
d) Prior to release of the final plat,City Attorney shall review and approve the covenants and
documents describing the creation,structure,rights, obligations and responsibilities of the
various homeowners associations serving the development. The covenants shall include
conditions of this resolution that have not been met as of the release of the plat, provide
common access easements for each lot that receives access from a shared private street or
driveway,and shall provide for maintenance of all common areas.
Page 4 of 4
PUD No.4 Agreement-STONEBAY
EXHIBIT M -Schedule of Development Fees
Commencement of Phase One improvements shall not occur until Developer has made payment to
the City of the prorated portion of the Development Fees (Park Dedication Fe; Storm Water and
Drainage Trunk Fee,and Sewer and Water Connection Charges)for Phase One. Commencement of
Future Phase improvements shall not occur until Developer has made payment to the City of the
prorated portion of the Development Fees associated with said Future Phase, The Development Fees
for each Phase shall be based on the proportional acreage or number of units within each Phase
depending on the method of calculation of each fee,relative to the total project, as defined below.
I. Park Dedication Fee
Fee Calculation Based on Ordinance
A.Commercial Outlets. The pack fee for each of the commercial outlets(Outlots A and D)shall be
due upon City Council approval of a development proposal for each lot and shall be paid prior to
issuance of permits for construction within each Oudot.
The amount of the park fee for the commercial outlots by City ordinance is 8%of the Land Fair
Market Value prior to development. The combined Land Fair Market Value for the commercial
outlets is established at$1,237,126 based on the combined area within the Outlets of 7.19 acres @
$3.95/s.f. established value per square foot.
Fair Market Value ='7.19 acres x 43,560 s.f./acre x$3.95/s.f=$1,237,126
8%Paris Fee=0.08 x$1,237,126=$98,970
Min/max range check(must be between$8,125/ac and$13,875/ac):$98,9'70/7.19 acres=$13,765/ac.
B. Residential. The residential park fee is based on the value of the land being developed
residentially. The park fee for the residential portion of the development by City ordinance is 8%of
the Land Fair Market Value prior to development. The established value of the land is based on the
developers purchase price of the residential portion of the property which is $4,622,083.
8%Park Fee=0.08 x$4,622,083—$369,767
Min/max range check:(must be between$3,250hmit and$5,550/unit)
$369,767/162 units $2,283/unit(below required min-ntax range)
Minimum fee applied: 162 units x$3,250/unit=$526,500
Phasing
A. Residential. Proration of Fee Payments: The number of dwelling units within each Phase
divided by the total number of units within all Phases shall determine the fraction of the total fee due.
B. Commercial. Proration: If Outlots A and D are not developed at the same time,the acreage
of the outlet being developed divided by the total acreage of both outlets shall determine the fraction
of the total fee due.
Page 1 of 4
IL Sewer and Water Connection Charges(SWCC)
Fee Calculation Based on Ordinance:
1. Sanitary Sewer Connection Charges
1989 Highway 12 Area. $5,320.00 per acre
Residential Portion: 44.26 acres x$5,320.00/acre=$235,463
Commercial Portion: 7.19 acres x$5,320.00/acre= $38,251
2. Municipal Water Connection Charge
1989 Highway 12 Area $8,795.00 per acre
Residential Portion: 44.26 acres x$8,795.00/acre=$389,267
Commercial Portion: 7.19 acres x$8,795.00/acre=$63,236
Residential Total SWCC=$235,463•+$389,267=$624,730
Commercial Total SWCC=$38,251 +$63,236=$101,486
Phasing
A. Residential. Sewer and Water Connection Charges(SWCC)shall be converted to a`per
unit' basis for purposes of collection prior to commencement of each Phase per the
following formula:
B.
Number of dwelling units in Phase
$624,730 x ----------------------------------- =SWCC Due Prior to Commencement of Phase
162
B. Commercial. Proration: If Outlots A and D are not developed at the same time,the acreage
of the outlet being developed divided by the total acreage of both outlots shall determine the fraction
of the total Commercial SWCC due.
HI. Storm Water&Drainage Trunk Fee
Fee Calculation Based on Ordinance:
Multi-Family.4 or fewer Units/Acre $4,860.00 per acre
Multi-Family: Greater than 4 Units/Acre $5,670.00 per acre
Commercial: $6,480.00 per acre
Gross Commercial SW&DT Fee: 9.90 acres x$6,480.00/acre=$64,152
Net Commercial SW&DT Fee: 7.19 acres x$6,480.00/acre=$46,591
Transfer to Residential: $17,561
Residential SW&DT Fee: 41.55 acres @ 6 units/acre=41.55 x$5,670=$235,600
Transfer from Commercial: $17,561
Total Residential: $253,149
Page 2 of 4
Phasing
A. Residential. Proration:The number of dwelling units within each Phase divided by the total
number of units within all Phases shall determine the fraction of the total SW&DT fee due
for each Phase.
B. Commercial. Proration: If Outlots A and D are not developed at the same time,the acreage
of the outlot being developed divided by the total acreageofboth outlots shall determine the fraction
of the total Commercial SW&DT fee due.
IV. Credits
A.Park Pee Credit for Trails Construction.
The developer shall be granted a credit toward park fees for the costs of construction(but not the
land cost or easement cost)of the public trail that will be required along Willow Drive and through
the commercial outlots, not including sidewalks along Kelley Parkway or within the residential
development. At an estimated construction cost of$20 per lineal foot,the trail credit is estimated to
be a total reduction of appi uximately$68,000. The City Engineer shall verify the actual costs of trail
construction for purposes of determining the final credit amount.
B. SW&DT Fee Credits.
1. Developer shall be credited for provision of excess capacity in water lines the City has
required to be 12" vs. 8" and any offsite watennain improvements.
2. Developer shall be credited for a portion of the costs to construct the regional pond and
offsite drainage facilities, such cietlit to be based on the difference between the cost of a
pond with capacity needed to serve just the StoneBay and associated commercial
development, and the cost of the regional pond and offsite drainage facilities_ Developer
shall calculate this cost differential and City Engineer shall verify.
3. Developer shall be credited for the actual cost plus 12% design cost for incremental
cost/benefit of providing storm sewer to the properties to the west of StoneBay(i.e.2 dental
office sites).
C. Credit Format.
Credits will be in the form of a reimbursement to the Developer for actual costs as verified
by the City Engineer.
V. Inflation Adjustments
A. Park Fees. Park Fee amounts as established in this Exhibit shall notbe subject to inflationary
adjustment.
Page 3 of 4
B. Sewer and Water Connection Charges. For any Phase for which Final Nat Approval is
granted after December 31, 2003, the Sewer and Water Connection Charges due shall be
recalculated based on the then current City Fee Schedule SWCC rates. The Developer
shall be allowed to prepay SWCC fees for future Phases at the 2003 rate no later than
December 31,2003.
C. Storm Water & Drainage Trunk Fees. For any Phase for which Final. Plat Approval is
granted after December 31,2003,the SW&DT due shall be recalculated based on the then
current City Fee Schedule SW&DT rates. The Developer shall be allowed to prepay SW&
DT fees for future Phases at the 2003 rate no later than December 31,2003.
VI. Pending MnDOT Stormwater Pond Charge
MnDOT has established a$35,000 charge to the City for construction of the existing stormwater
pond within the MnDOT right-of-way. If the City is unsuccessful in eliminating this charge, the
Developer has agreed to pay a portion of this charge,amount to be established,per the Developer's
letter of October 2,2002 on file in the City Offices.
Page 4 of 4
Orono, MN Code of Ordinances Page 1 of 19
DIVISION 11. - RPUD RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT] PC ExhibitG
Footnotes:
—(7)--
Cross reference—Planned unit development §78-1001 et seq.
Sec. 78-621. - Purpose.
The purpose of the residential planned unit development (RPUD) district is to provide a district which
will allow for the implementation of certain residential housing goals established in the 2000-2020 Orono
Community Management Plan("CMP" or"comprehensive plan"). The RPUD district is established to
accommodate the densities and types of residential development contemplated in the CMP by
incorporating the principles of the planned unit development concept. The RPUD district will encourage the
following:
(1) Flexibility in land development and redevelopment in order to utilize new techniques of building
design, construction and land development;
(2) Provision of housing to meet lifecycle, and affordable and moderate cost housing needs;
(3) Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sitings and the
clustering of buildings and land uses;
(4) Preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection of sensitive
environmental features, including steep slopes, poor soils and trees;
(5) High quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing
and planned;
(6) Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along
significant corridors within the city; and
(7) Development which is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
(Ord. No. 202 2nd series, § 1(1), 2-26-2001)
Sec. 78-622. - Exceptions.
This section shall not apply to any residential PUD or PRD which has received preliminary or final
approval by the city council prior to the effective date of the ordinance from which this division is derived,
unless such application is requested by the property owner and approved by the city council.
(Ord. No. 202 2nd series, § 1(9), 2-26-2001)
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono,MN Code of Ordinances Page 2 of 19
Sec.78-623.-Permitted uses.
Within the RPUD district, no structure or land shall be used except for one or more of the following
uses:
(1) One-family detached dwellings.
(2) Publicly owned parks and playgrounds.
(3) Municipal buildings.
(4) Multifamily attached dwellings only when consistent within the areas of the city designated as
urban area in the comprehensive plan.
(Code 1984, § 10.20(2); Ord. No.202 2nd series§ 1(2), 2-26-2001)
State Law reference— State mandated permitted uses, Minn. Stat.§462.357, subd. 7.
Sec. 78-624. -Conditional uses.
Within the RPUD district, no land or structure shall be used for the following uses except by conditional
use permit:
(1) Public service structures. Public service structures, including but not limited to electric transmission
lines, buildings, such as telephone exchange stations, booster or pressure regulating stations,
wells, and plumbing stations, elevated tanks, lift stations and electrical power substations, provided
no building shall be located within 50 feet from any lot line of an abutting lot in an R district. Prior
to granting such permit it shall be found that the architectural design of service structures is
compatible to the neighborhood in which it is to be located and thus will promote the general
welfare. Public service structures that have been approved by the city at required public hearings
for public improvement projects shall not require a conditional use permit, but such structures
shall be subject to all other appropriate standards set forth in this section; amendments to
approved plans involving design and/or placement of these structures will require written notice by
the city to all affected property owners 14 days prior to the adoption of the amended plans by the
council. Personal wireless services and commercial broadcasting antennas and towers shall not be
considered public service structures. Uses allowed by conditional use permit shall be reviewed for
compliance with the PUD master development plan and with the applicable conditional use permit
standards of this division. Uses allowed by conditional use permit shall also be subject to site and
building plan review pursuant to this division.
(2) Assisted living facilities.Assisted living facilities as defined in this chapter, subject to the general
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono,MN Code of Ordinances Page 3 of 19
conditions and multifamily-specific conditions applicable to uses in the RPUD district.
(Ord. No. 202 2nd series, § 1(3), 2-26-2001; Ord. No. 75 3rd series, § 1, 7-12-2010)
Sec. 78-625.-Accessory uses.
Within any RPUD district,the only permitted accessory uses and structures are the following:
(1) Private garages and parking space.
(2) Private swimming pools,tennis courts, and paddocks.
(3) Home occupations, as defined in this chapter.All home occupations shall comply with the
provisions of section 78-1376,and the licensing provisions of section 26-76,when applicable.
(4) Signs,as regulated in this chapter.
(5) Buildings temporarily located for purposes of constructing on the premises for a period not to
exceed time necessary for such constructing.
(6) Gardening and other horticultural uses, including aviaries and decorative landscape features.
(7) Communication reception/transmission devices as follows:
a. Accessory antennas,which shall be limited to radio and television receiving antennas, satellite
dishes, TVROs, and amateur shortwave radio transmitting and receiving antennas.Accessory
antennas that are accessory to the principal use of property are permitted accessory uses in all
zoning districts, provided they meet the following conditions:
1. Height.A ground-mounted accessory antenna shall not exceed 20 feet in height from
ground level.
2. Yards.Accessory antennas shall not be located within the required front yard setback,
corner side yard setback or side yard setback abutting a street.
3. Roofs. If vegetation or obstructions interfere with satellite signals at a location in any
allowable placement area,the accessory antenna may be placed on the roof of any
authorized structure on the premises.
4. Location.Accessory antennas shall not be located within a required yard or setback area or
within drainage or utility easements.Antenna towers shall be set back from adjacent
property lines a horizontal distance no less than the maximum height of the antenna.
5.
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono,MN Code of Ordinances Page 4 of 19
Building permits.A building permit shall be required for the installation of any accessory
antenna requiring a conditional use permit. Building permit applications shall be
accompanied by a site plan and structural component data for the accessory antenna,
including details of anchoring.The building official must approve the plans before
installation.
6. Lightning protection. Each accessory antenna shall be grounded to protect against natural
lightning strikes in conformance with the National Electrical Code as adopted by the city.
7. Electrical code.Accessory antenna electrical equipment and connections shall be designed
and installed in conformance with the National Electrical Code as adopted by the city.
8. Color/content.Accessory antennas shall be of a neutral color and shall not be used as
signage.
b. Amateur shortwave radio antennas and towers which do not meet the conditions for accessory
antennas may be allowed with a conditional use permit in all zoning districts, provided they
meet the following conditions:
1. Height.When an amateur shortwave radio antenna is mounted on an antenna tower,the
total height of the antenna and tower shall not exceed 65 feet.
2. Yards.Amateur shortwave radio antennas and towers shall not be located within a front
corner side or side yard.
3. Setbacks.Amateur shortwave radio antennas and towers shall not be located within any
required setback area and shall be located no less than the height of the antenna and town
from the property line.
(8) Privately owned buildings to be used for recreational or social purposes, or for use as storage
areas for maintenance equipment or rubbish.
(9) Other uses that are customarily incidental to,and subordinate to,the allowed permitted and
conditional uses in this district.
(Code 1984, § 10.20(4); Ord. No. 161 2nd series, § 6, 6-7-1997; Ord. No.202 2nd series, § 1 (4), 2-26-2001;
Ord. No.221 2nd series, § 3, 9-23-2002; Ord. No. 106 3rd series, § 12, 6-10-2013)
Sec.78-626.-Development standards.
Within the RPUD district all development shall be in compliance with the following:
(1)
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono,MN Code of Ordinances Page 5 of 19
Minimum area;shoreland district limitation. Each site proposed for rezoning to RPUD shall have a
minimum area of five acres, excluding areas within a designated wetland,floodplain or shoreland
district or right-of-way, unless the council finds the existence of one of the following:
a. Unusual physical features of the property Itself or of the surrounding neighborhood such that
development as a RPUD will conserve a physical or topographic feature of importance to the
neighborhood or community.
b. The property is directly adjacent to or across a public street from property which has been
developed previously as a RPUD or planned residential development and will be perceived as
and will function as an extension of that previously approved development.
c. The property is located in an area where the proposed development provides a transition
between a commercial or industrial area and an existing residential area or on an intermediate
or principal arterial as defined in the comprehensive plan.
d. The property contains steep slopes or a substantial number of significant trees that could be
preserved through the clustering of buildings or other design techniques not generally allowed
by the existing zoning district.
No property located within 250 feet of the ordinary high water level (OHWL) of a protected lake or
tributary as defined in article IX of this chapter shall be rezoned to RPUD. However, for a property
that is partially located less than 250 feet from the OHWL and partially located more than 250 feet
from the OHWL, the portion located more than 250 feet from the OHWL may be rezoned to RPUD
at the discretion of the city council when all other requirements are met.
(2) Uses. Each property rezoned to RPUD shall only be used for the use or uses for which the site is
designated in the comprehensive plan, except that the city may permit rezoning to RPUD on a site
designated for commercial use if the city council finds that such use is in the best interests of the
city and is consistent with the requirements of this division. if a commercial site is to be rezoned to
RPUD,the city may forward a copy of the request to the metropolitan council for review.
(3) Sewer availability.A site proposed to be rezoned to RPUD with proposed density greater than one
unit per two acres must be in the metropolitan urban services area (MUSA)and must be serviced
by municipal sewer.
(4) Density. Each development in the RPUD district shall have a density within the range specified in
the comprehensive plan for the specific site. If the site is not designated in the comprehensive plan
for residential use, the appropriate density shall be determined by the city based upon the city
council's finding that such density is consistent with the intent of this division and of the
comprehensive plan. Developments with proposed densities in excess of the densities
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono,MN Code of Ordinances Page 6 of 19
contemplated in the comprehensive plan shall be allowed only on properties which are currently
zoned and guided for commercial use, in order to maintain the character and integrity of the areas
zoned and guided for residential use.
(5) Incentives.The city may utilize incentives to encourage the construction of projects which are
consistent with the city's housing goals. Incentives may include modification of density(only for
properties currently zoned and guided for commercial use)and floor area ratio requirements for
developments providing lifecycle housing and affordable and moderate cost housing. incentives for
affordable and moderate cost housing may be approved by the city only after the developer and
city have entered into an agreement to ensure that the low and moderate cost units remain
available to persons of low and moderate income for at least 20 years.
(6) Floor area ratio. Floor area ratios(FARs)shall be limited per the following table:
Comprehensive Plan Designation Maximum Floor Area Ratio*
Low or medium density residential (up to 50 and including 0.5
6.0 units per acre)
High density residential (in excess of 6.0 units per acre) 1.0
*FAR =Total Building Floor Area/Total Lot Area
Individual lots within a development in the RPUD district may exceed these standards as long as the
average meets these standards.
(7) Development standards for attached and multifamily dwelling structures. Each site rezoned to
RPUD and developed for attached or multiple-family dwelling uses shall be subject to the following
standards:
a. Setbacks and separation of uses.Within the RPUD district the setback for all attached and
multifamily dwelling buildings and their accessory buildings from any bordering or abutting
street line shall be 35 feet for local streets and 50 feet from railroad lines or collector or arterial
streets,as designated in the comprehensive plan, except that in no case shall the setback be
less than the height of the building.The setback for all buildings from exterior RPUD site lot
lines not abutting a public street shall be 35 feet, except that In no case shall the setback be
less than the height of the building. Building setbacks from internal public streets shall be
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono, MN Code of Ordinances Page 7 of 19
determined by the city based on characteristics of the specific RPUD site. Parking lots and
driving lanes shall be set back at least 20 feet from all exterior lot lines of a RPUD site.The
setback for parking structures, including decks and ramps, shall be 35 feet from local streets
and 50 feet from all other street classifications, except that in no case shall the setback be less
than the height of the structure. Parking structure setbacks from external lot lines shall be 50
feet or the height of the structure, whichever is greater, when adjacent to residential
properties; 35 feet, when adjacent to nonresidential properties. Parking structure setbacks
from internal public or private streets shall be determined by the city based on characteristics
of the specific RPUD site.Where industrial uses abut developed or platted single-family lots
outside the RPUD site, greater exterior building and parking setbacks may be required in order
to provide effective screening. The city council shall make a determination regarding the
adequacy of screening proposed by the applicant. Screening may include the use of natural
topography or earth berming, existing and proposed plantings and other features, such as
roadways and wetlands, which provide separation of uses. Property rezoned to RPUD shall be
considered a residential district for purposes of determining building and parking setback
requirements on adjacent high density residential, commercial and industrial property outside
the RPUD.
b. Height limitations. For properties guided for residential use in the comprehensive plan, a
building height limit of 30 feet shall apply. For properties currently zoned or guided in the
comprehensive plan for commercial use, height may exceed 30 feet but shall not exceed three
stories(not including underground parking level) and shall maintain a residential character by
incorporating pitched or hipped roof structure. No mansard or flat roofed multiple-family
building will be allowed.
c. Outside storage limitations. Building materials, recreational vehicles, boats, RV's, snowmobiles,
and other items of personal property shall not be stored outside within any site used for
attached or multifamily uses.
(8) Development standards for single-family detached dwellings in the RPUD district. Each RPUD site
developed for single-family detached dwellings at medium density(i.e., densities ranging from one
unit per acre to six units per acre) shall be subject to the following standards:
a. Permitted locations: in areas of the city where smaller single-family detached dwelling lots will
allow for clustering to preserve significant natural features, or in areas where a mixture of
higher density attached dwellings and lower density detached single-family dwellings will result
in a development that does not exceed the overall guided density.
b. Minimum SFR lot size: 15,000 square feet.
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono,MN Code of Ordinances Page 8 of 19
c. Minimum lot width at the setback line: 90 feet.
d. Minimum lot depth: 125 feet.
e. Minimum front yard setback: 25 feet on internal streets within the RPUD site. On exterior or
through streets a setback of 35 feet must be provided on local streets and a 50-foot setback on
collector or arterial streets, as defined in the comprehensive plan.
f. Minimum side yard setback:ten feet along interior lot lines; 15 feet on lot lines along the
exterior of the RPUD site. Side yards abutting streets must meet the minimum front yard
setbacks as noted in subsection (8)e of this section. Structures in side yards abutting another
residential zoning district shall meet the side yard setback requirement of the adjacent zoning
district.
g. Rear yard setback: minimum of 40 feet or 20 percent of the depth of the lot,whichever is less.
h. Building height: maximum of 30 feet.
i. All dwelling units, including manufactured homes,shall have a depth of at least 20 feet for at
least 50 percent of their width.All dwelling units, including manufactured homes, shall have a
width of at least 20 feet for at least 50 percent of their depth. •
j. All dwellings shall have a permanent foundation in conformance with the state building code.
k. Accessory structures shall conform to the setbacks established for principal structures, except
as follows:
1. All accessory structures located more than ten feet from a principal structure may be
located a minimum of ten feet from a rear or side lot line when that line does not abut a
street right-of-way.
• 2. No accessory structure shall be located closer to the front lot line than the principal
structure, regardless of the principal structure setback.
1. No accessory structure shall occupy more than 30 percent of the side or rear yard in which it is
located, nor exceed 1,000 square feet in area, nor exceed 12 feet in height.
m. Off-street parking shall be provided for at least two vehicles for each single-family dwelling.A
suitable location for a garage measuring at least 20 feet by 24 feet without a variance shall be
provided and indicated as such on a survey or site plan to be submitted when applying for a
building permit to construct a new dwelling or alter an existing garage.
(9) More than one building allowed. More than one building may be placed on one platted or recorded
lot in a RPUD site.
(10)
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono, MN Code of Ordinances Page 9 of 19
Single housing type permitted.Any RPUD development which involves a single housing type shall
be permitted, provided that it is otherwise consistent with the objectives of this division and the
comprehensive plan.
(11) Private recreational area. Each RPUD development shall provide a minimum of ten percent of the
gross project area in private recreational uses for project residents. Such area shall be for active
or passive recreational uses suited to the needs of the residents of the project, including swimming
pools,trails, nature areas, picnic areas, tot lots and saunas. Private recreational area requirements
are in addition to the standard park dedication requirements.
(12) Ownership.All property to be included within a RPUD development shall be under unified
ownership or control,or subject to such legal restrictions or covenants as may be necessary to
ensure compliance with the approved master development plan and final site and building plan.
(13) Signage. Signs shall be restricted to those which are permitted in a sign plan approved by the city
and shall be regulated by permanent covenants.
(14) Landscaping screening and buffering.
a. Landscape plan requirements. Landscape plans shall be prepared by a landscape architect or
other qualified person acceptable to the city, drawn to the scale of not less than one Inch
equals 50 feet and shall show the following:
1. Boundary lines of the property with accurate dimensions;
2. Locations of existing and proposed buildings, parking lots, roads,trails and other
Improvements;
3. Proposed grading plan with two-foot contour intervals;
4. Location, approximate size and common name of existing trees and shrubs;
5. A planting schedule containing symbols, quantities, common and botanical names, size of
plant materials, root condition and special planting instructions;
6. Planting details Illustrating proposed locations of all new plant material;
7. Locations and details of other landscape features, including berms, fences and planter
boxes;
8. Details of restoration of disturbed areas, including areas to be sodded and seeded;
9. Location and details of irrigation systems; and
10. Details and cross sections of all required screening.
b. Minimum landscaping requirements.
1.
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono,MN Code of Ordinances Page 10 of 19
All open areas of a lot which are not used or improved for required parking areas, drives,
trails or storage shall be landscaped with a combination of deciduous and coniferous
species, including overstorytrees, understorytrees, shrubs,flowers and groundcover
materials.The plan for landscaping shall include ground cover, bushes, shrubbery, trees,
sculpture,foundations, decorative walks or other similar site design features or materials
in a quantity having a minimum value in conformance with the following table:
Minimum Tree and Shrub Requirements
Vegetation Type Size Quantity
Overstory deciduous 2.5-inch bb (Caliper) One tree per 1,000 gross square feet of
trees building footprint area or one tree per 40
lineal feet of site perimeter, whichever is
greater.
Coniferous trees 6-foot height bb Minimum of 30 percent of required overstory
trees must be coniferous
Understory shrubs 3-gal. potted or 18- One shrub per 300 gross square feet of
inch building footprint area or one shrub per 30
lineal feet of site perimeter, whichever is
greater.
Ornamental 1.5-inch bb (Caliper) Not required; but two ornamental deciduous
deciduous trees trees may be substituted for one required
overstory deciduous tree (maximum
substitution equals 25 percent of required
overstory deciduous trees)
Credits for existing trees: The city council shall have sole discretion whether credit shall be
granted for existing healthy trees
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono, MN Code of Ordinances Page 11 of 19
In instances where healthy plant materials of acceptable species exist on a site prior to its
development,the application of the standards in subsection(14)b of this section may be
adjusted by the city to allow credit for such material, provided that such adjustment is
consistent with the intent of this division.
2. A reasonable attempt shall be made to preserve as many existing trees as is practicable
and to incorporate them into the site plan.
3. All new overstory trees shall be balled and burlapped or moved from the growing site by
tree spade. Deciduous trees shall have a minimum caliper of 21i inches. Coniferous trees
shall be a minimum of six feet In height. Ornamental trees shall have a minimum caliper of
11i inches.
4. All site areas not covered by buildings, sidewalks, parking lots, driveways,trails, patios, or
similar hardcover shall be covered with sod or an equivalent ground cover approved by the
city. This requirement shall not apply to site areas retained in a natural state.
5. In order to provide for adequate maintenance of landscaped areas, an underground
sprinkler system shall be provided as part of each new development, except one- and two-
family dwellings and additions to existing structures which do not at least equal the floor
area of the existing structure.A sprinkler system shall be provided for all landscaped areas,
except areas to be preserved in a natural state.
6. Not more than 50 percent of the required number of trees shall be composed of one
species.The city shall maintain a list of prohibited species,which shall not be used for
landscaping.
c. Interior parking lot landscaping.
1. All parking lots containing over 100 stalls shall be designed to incorporate unpaved,
landscaped Islands in number and dimension as required by the city.All landscape islands
shall contain a minimum of 180 square feet. Islands which are necessary to promote the
safe and efficient flow of traffic shall not be subject to the 100-stall standard and shall be
required by the city when warranted.
2. Parking lot landscape areas, including landscape islands,shall be reasonably distributed
throughout the parking lot area so as to break up expanses of paved areas. Parking lot
landscape areas shall be provided with deciduous shade trees, ornamental or evergreen
trees, plus ground cover, mulch and/or shrubbery as determined appropriate by the
planning commission. Parking lot landscape trees shall be provided at the rate of one tree
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono, MN Code of Ordinances Page 12 of 19
for each 15 surface parking spaces provided, or major fraction thereof. Parking lot
landscaping shall be contained in planting beds bordered by a raised concrete curb or
equivalent approved by the planning commission.
d. Maintenance of landscaping.The owner,tenant and their respective agents shall be jointly and
severally responsible for the maintenance of all landscaping in a condition presenting a
healthy, neat and orderly appearance and free from refuse and debris. Plants and ground
cover which are required by an approved site or landscape plan, and which have died, shall be
replaced within three months of notification by the city. However,the time for compliance may
be extended up to nine months by the city in order to allow for seasonal or weather conditions.
e. Retaining walls. Retaining walls exceeding four feet in height,and staged walls which
cumulatively exceed 16 feet in height or involve more than four tiers, must be constructed in
accordance with plans prepared by a registered engineer or landscape architect.
f. Landscaping performance security required.When screening, landscaping or other similar
improvements to property are required by this division, a letter of credit shall be supplied by
the owner in an amount equal to at least 11/2 times the value of such screening, landscaping or
other improvements.The letter of credit shall be conditioned upon reimbursement of all
expenses incurred by the city for engineering, legal, contracting or other fees in connection
with making or completing such improvements. The letter of credit shall be provided prior to
the issuance of any building permit and shall be valid for a period of time equal to two full
growing seasons after the date of installation of the landscaping.The city may accept some
other form of security in lieu of a letter of credit in an amount and under such conditions that
the city may determine to be appropriate. If construction of the project is not completed within
the time prescribed by building permits and other approvals,the city may, at its option,
complete the work required at the expense of the owner and the surety. The city may allow an
extended period of time for completion of all landscaping, if the delay is due to conditions
which are reasonably beyond the control of the developer. Extensions,which may not exceed
nine months, may be granted due to seasonal or weather conditions.When an extension is
granted,the city shall require such additional security as it deems appropriate.
g. Screening and buffering.
1. The following uses shall be screened or buffered in accordance with the requirements of
this section:
i. Principal buildings and structures and any building or structure accessory thereto used
for residential uses at a density of greater than four units per acre shall be buffered
from residential lots located in any R district.
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono, MN Code of Ordinances Page 13 of 19
ii. Off-street parking facilities containing six or more spaces shall be buffered from
streets located within 50 feet. Parking facilities shall be buffered with landscape zones.
iii. Loading docks shall be screened from all lot lines and public roads.
iv. Trash storage facilities shall be screened from all lot lines and public roads.
v. Access roads serving multifamily buildings shall be screened as necessary to eliminate
the impact of vehicle headlights shining toward adjacent residential neighborhoods.
2. Required screening or buffering may be achieved with fences, walls, earth berms, hedges,
or other landscape materials.All walls and fences shall be architecturally harmonious with
the principal building. Earth berms shall not exceed a slope of 3:1.The screen shall be
designed to employ materials which provide an effective visual barrier during all seasons.
3. All required screening or buffering shall be located on the lot occupied by the use, building,
facility or structure to be screened. No screening or buffering shall be located on any
public right-of-way or within eight feet of the traveled portion of any street or highway.
4. Screening or buffering required by subsection(14) of this section shall be of a height
needed to accomplish the goals of subsection (14) of this section. Screening methods
incorporating roofs over storage, trash or mechanical facilities to screen from higher
adjacent properties or buildings may be required. Height of plantings required under
subsection (14) of this section shall be measured at the time of installation.
(15) Architectural standards
a. It is not the intent of the city to restrict design freedom unduly when reviewing project
architecture in connection with a site and building plan. However, it is in the best interest of the
city to promote high standards of architectural design and compatibility with surrounding
structures and neighborhoods. Architectural plans shall be prepared by an architect or other
qualified persons acceptable to the city and shall show the following for all structures other
than single-family detached dwellings:
1. Elevations of all sides of the building.
2. Type and color of exterior building materials.
3. A typical floor plan.
4. Dimensions of all structures.
5. The location of trash and recycling containers and of heating, ventilation and air
conditioning equipment.
b.
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono, MN Code of Ordinances Page 14 of 19
Unadorned prestressed concrete panels, concrete block and unfinished metal shall not be
permitted as exterior materials for residential principal and accessory buildings.This restriction
shall apply to all principal structures and to all accessory buildings.The city may, at its
discretion, allow architecturally enhanced block or concrete panels.
c. Accessory buildings shall be architecturally compatible with principal structures.
d. All rooftop or ground-mounted mechanical equipment and exterior trash and recycling storage
areas shall be fully enclosed or screened so as to be not visible with materials compatible with
the principal structure.
e. Underground utilities shall be provided for all new and substantially renovated structures(the
term "substantially renovated" shall mean when the renovations exceed 30 percent of the
prerenovation value of the structure).
(16) Flexibility.The uniqueness of each RPUD requires that specifications and standards for streets,
utilities, public facilities and subdivisions may be subject to modification from the city ordinances
ordinarily governing them.The city council may therefore approve streets, utilities, public facilities
and land subdivisions which are not in compliance with usual specifications or ordinance
requirements, if it finds that strict adherence to such standards or requirements is not required to
meet the intent of this section or to protect the health, safety or welfare of the residents of the
RPUD,the surrounding area or the city as a whole.
(17) Traffic studies The city may require a traffic analysis to be prepared by a registered traffic
engineer approved by the city to assess potential traffic impacts on local streets. If impacts on
service levels of roadways and intersections are anticipated,the project will be approved only
contingent upon a traffic management plan that adequately mitigates those impacts.The plan may
include travel demand management strategies, use of transit facilities or other appropriate
measures to reduce traffic generation, and necessary improvements to road systems.The
developer shall have the responsibility to install all necessary road system improvements.
(18) Building permits. No building or other permit shall be issued for any work on property included
within a proposed or approved RPUD development, nor shall any work occur unless such work is
in compliance with the proposed or approved RPUD development.
(19) General regulations applicability.The requirements contained in this division pertaining to
general regulations for residential districts and performance standards shall apply to a RPUD
development as deemed appropriate by the city.
(20) Lighting standards.All RPUD developments shall be subject to the general performance standards
for lighting in this chapter.
(21)
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono,MN Code of Ordinances Page 15 of 19
Trails.When any portion of the project is within 1,000 feet of a public trail system, pedestrian
access shall be provided to the trail system by means of a public trail constructed at the developer's
expense.Where public rights-of-way are available, at the city's discretion the trail may utilize the
public right-of-way.Trails shall be of bituminous construction, or such other material as may be
approved by the city and shall be not less than eight feet in width.
(Ord. No. 202 2nd series, § 1(5), 2-26-2001; Ord. No. 94 3rd series, § 2, 9-24-2012)
Sec. 78-627. - Review of application; procedures.
(a) Concept plan review. In order to receive guidance in the design of a RPUD prior to submission of a
formal application, an applicant may submit a concept plan for review and comment by the planning
commission and city council. Submission of a concept plan is optional but is highly recommended for
large RPUDs. In order for the review to be of most help to the applicant,the concept plan should
contain such specific Information as is suggested by the city. Generally,this information should include
the following:
(1) Approximate building, road and trail locations;
(2) Height, bulk and square footage of buildings;
(3) Type and square footage of specific land uses;
(4) Number of dwelling units;
(5) Generalized grading plan showing areas to be cut,filled and preserved; and
(6) Staging and timing of the development.
The comments of the planning commission and city council shall address the consistency of the concept
plan with this section.The comments of the planning commission and city council shall be for guidance only
and, if positive, shall not be considered binding upon the planning commission or city council regarding
approval of the formal RPUD application when submitted.
(b) Master development p/an and rezoning. Approval of a rezoning to RPUD and approval of a master
development plan shall be subject to the procedures outlined in this chapter for a zoning map
amendment. The master development plan shall contain the following:
(1) Building location, height, bulk and square footage;
(2) Type and square footage of specific land uses;
(3) Number of dwelling units;
(4) Detailed street and utility locations and sizes;
(5) Parking layout;
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono,MN Code of Ordinances Page 16 of 19
(6) Drainage plan, including location and size of pipes and water storage areas;
(7) Grading plan and drainage plan, including two-foot contours;
(8) Generalized landscape plan;
(9) Generalized plan for uniform signs and lighting;
(10) Plan for timing and phasing of the development;
(11) Covenants or other restrictions proposed for the regulation of the development;
(12) Renderings or elevations of all sides of buildings to be constructed in the first phase of the
development;
(13) Trail plan; and
(14) Lighting plan.
Approval of the master development plan shall indicate approval of the listed Items in subsections(b)(1)
—(b)(14)of this section and shall occur in conjunction with rezoning of the property to RPUD.After rezoning
the property to RPUD, nothing shall be constructed on the RPUD site except in conformance with the
approved plans and this section.The procedure for notification of and public hearing on the master
development plan shall be the same as required for a zoning map amendment by this chapter.
(c) Development agreement/financial guarantee. Following the approval of the master development plan
but prior to final plan approval,the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the city relating to the
terms of the RPUD development, and shall also provide such financial guarantees as the city requires or
deems necessary. Such agreement may take the form of:
(1) A development contract
(2) A site improvement performance agreement; and/or
(3) Another form of binding instrument as may be required by the city.
(d) Final site and building plan.Approval of a final site and building plan for the entire RPUD or for specific
parts of the RPUD shall be subject to the procedures outlined In this division.The final site and building
plan shall contain information as required by the city, including the following:
(1) Detailed utility, street,grading and drainage plans;
(2) Detailed building elevations and floor plans;
(3) Detailed landscaping,sign and lighting plans; and
(4) Detailed trail plan.
(e) Substantial compliance.The final site and building plan shall be in substantial compliance with the
approved master development plan. Substantial compliance shall mean:
(1) Buildings, parking areas, roads and trails are in substantially the same location as previously
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono,MN Code of Ordinances Page 17 of 19
a p proved;
(2) The number of residential living units has not increased or decreased from that approved in the
master development plan;
(3) The gross floor area of any individual building has not been increased from that approved in the
master development plan;
(4) There has been no increase in the number of stories in any building
(5) Open space has not been decreased or altered to change its original design or intended use; and
(6) All special conditions required on the master development plan by the city have been incorporated
into the final site and building plan.
Approval of a final site and building plan shall signify approval of all plans necessary prior to application for
a building permit, subject to conformance with any conditions on the approval and subject to other
necessary approvals by the city.
(f) Simultaneous review.Applicants may combine the final site and building plan review with the master
development plan review by submitting all information required for both stages simultaneously.
(g) Basis for approval;conditions. In evaluating a site and building plan,the planning commission and city
council shall base their recommendations and actions regarding approval of a RPUD on a consideration
of the following:
(1) Compatibility of the proposed plan with this section and consistency with the goals, policies, and
objectives of the comprehensive plan and surface water management plan;
(2) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the greatest extent practicable by minimizing tree and
soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general character and
appearance of neighboring properties;
(3) Creation of compatible relationships between buildings and open spaces both on the site and
adjacent to it, incorporating natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a
visual relationship to the development, giving special attention to:
a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and uses on the site and provision of a desirable
environment for occupants,visitors and the general community.
b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping.
c. Materials,textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept
and the compatibility of the same with the adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and
vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of
about:blank 8/8/2016
Orono,MN Code of Ordinances Page 18 of 19
location and number access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access
points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and
arrangement and amount of parking.
(4) Promotion of energy conservation through design, location, orientation and elevation of structures,
the use and location of glass in structures and the use of landscape materials and site grading;
(5) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provisions for surface water
drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design
not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring
land uses; and
(6) Such other factors as the planning commission or city council deem relevant.
The planning commission and city council may attach such conditions to their actions as they shall
determine necessary or convenient to better accomplish the purposes of this section.
(Ord. No. 202 2nd series,§ 1(6),2-26-2001)
Sec.78-628.-Term of approval.
(a) If application has not been made for a final site and building plan approval pursuant to the approved
master development plan for all or a part of the property within a RPUD by December 31 of the year
following the date on which the RPUD zoning map amendment became effective or, if within that
period no extension of time has been granted,the city council may rezone the property to the original
zoning classification at the time of the RPUD application or to a zoning classification consistent with the
comprehensive plan designation for the property. In the absence of a rezoning, the approved master
development plan shall remain the legal control governing development of the property included within
the RPUD.
(b) If construction on the property included within an approved final site and building plan has not started
by December 31 of the year following the date on which such final site and building plan was approved
or, if building construction in a phase of a RPUD approved to be built in phases has not started within
this period,or, if within that period no extension of the time has been granted,the city council may
rezone the property to the original zoning classification at the time of the RPUD application or to a
zoning classification consistent with the comprehensive plan designation for the property. In the
absence of rezoning,the approved master development plan and final site and building plan shall
remain the legal control governing development of the property included within the RPUD.
(Ord. No.202 2nd series, § 1(7),2-26-2001)
about:blank 8/8/2016
•
Orono,MN Code of Ordinances Page 19 of 19
Sec.78-629.-Amendments.
Major amendments to an approved master development plan may be approved by the city council after
review by the planning commission.The notification and public hearing procedure for such amendment
shall be the same as for approval of the original RPUD.A major amendment is any amendment which:
(1) Substantially alters the location of buildings, parking areas or roads;
(2) Increases or decreases the number of residential dwelling units;
(3) Increases the gross floor area of any individual building;
(4) Increases the number of stories of any building;
(5) Decreases the amount of open space or alters it in such a way as to change its original design or
intended use;or
(6) Creates noncompliance with any special condition attached to the approval of the master
development plan.
Any other amendment may be made through review and approval by a simple majority vote of the council.
(Ord. No.202 2nd series, § 1(8), 2-26-2001)
Secs.78-630--78-640. - Reserved.
about:blank 8/8/2016
Date Application Received: 06/21/17 OA,
Date Application Considered as Complete:07/05/17 l VO
60-Day Review Period Expires: 09/03/17
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members y
Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator AxFSHOv-t
From: Melanie Curtis, Planner Y1GG
Date: 17 July 2017
Subject: #17-3950, Nor-Son o/b/o Michael & Meredith Kuhlman, 1760 Shoreline Drive,
Variances
Public Hearing
Application Summary: The applicant is requesting an average lakeshore setback variance and lot
width variance in order to develop the property.
Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval.
Background
This property is the former location of the Winton Guest House (a.k.a.the Frank Gehry guest
house).The guest house was removed from the property in 2008 and has been vacant since that
time.The property owners wish to construct a new residence on the property. Due to the
extreme setback of the home on 1700 Shoreline Drive,which is the only adjacent lakeshore lot,
an average lakeshore setback is required. Additionally because the standards in Section 78-72
regarding Lots of Record cannot be met, a lot width variance is required.
LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Section 78-420,78-1279,&78-1605-Setbacks:
LR-1A Required Proposed
Rear 50' 162'
+900' house
Street/Shoreline Drive 50' +900' pool
West Side 30' 32' house
37' pool
East Side 30' 54' house
±90' pool
Wetland 35' or 10'+ buffer +300' house& pool
Lakeshore 75' ±975 house
±960 pool
The proposed pool is set at approximately 960 feet from the
Average Lakeshore* lake; and the home is approximately 975 feet from the lake.
Both are lakeward of the average lakeshore setback based on
the home at 1700 Shoreline Drive.
FILE#17-3950
17 July 2017
Page 2 of 5
*The actual average setback measurement has not been provided. The applicant will be
providing the measurement of the distance between the house at 1700 Shoreline and the
lakeshore for the Planning Commission meeting.
Section 78-420-Lot Area/Width:
LR-1A Lot Area Lot Width
Required 87,120 s.f. (2.0 acres) 200'
Actual 175,175 s.f. (4.0 acre) 120'@ 75'SB/100' @ OHWL
Section 78-1403-Structural Coverage:
The property exceeds 1.99 acres,therefore structural coverage limitations do not apply.
Section 78-1700-Hardcover Calculations:
Stormwater
Overlay District Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover
Tier
Tier 1 175,175 s.f. 43,793 s.f. 9,139 s.f. Shoreline Drive
(25%) (5.2%) w/in 75'
Applicable Regulations:
Lot Width Variance (Section 78-420)
Zoning Code Section 78-72 provides options for the redevelopment of lots which do not meet
the minimum area or width requirements for the respective zoning district.Substandard
properties within the Shoreland Overlay District, like the subject lot, are able to be redeveloped
without variances if specific standards are met;such as:
1. All setback requirements can be met.
2. A Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules,chapter 7080, can
be installed or the lot is connected to a public sewer;and
3. The impervious surface coverage meets all hardcover location and square footage
restrictions of this chapter and the total square footage of hardcover does not exceed
25 percent of the entire lot area.
4. All other zoning district standards can be met.
The applicant's need for an average setback variance results in the property's inability to
conform to#1 above.Therefore, a lot width variance is also required in order to develop the
property.
Average Lakeshore Setback Variance (Section 78-1279)
The applicant is proposing to construct a new home with a lakeside pool on the property.
Because 1700 Shoreline Drive is the only adjacent lakeshore lot,the average lakeshore setback
variance for the subject property is determined by the distance between the 1700 Shoreline
Drive home and the lake. The 1700 Shoreline Drive property has lakeshore on both Tanager Bay
on the north and Smith's Bay on the south.This home is set back approximately 1000 feet from
the lake on the south side making the majority of the subject property unbuildable due to the
applied Average Lakeshore Setback. The new home and pool are proposed to encroach
lakeward of the average lakeshore setback line.
FILE#17-3950
17 July 2017
Page 3 of 5
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 lot
width variance requested is consistent with the general intent of the Ordinance. The
requested average lakeshore setback variance is in harmony with the Ordinance as the
most adjacent neighbor sits at a higher elevation and their lake views will not be
impacted by the new home.
2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variances resulting in a
permit for construction of a single family residence in a residential zone 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
portions of the proposed home and pool lakeward of the average lakeshore
setback appears to be reasonable as the views of the lake enjoyed adjacent
lakeshore property will not adversely impacted;the distance between the
homes, mature vegetation and topography separate the proposed home from
the adjacent neighbors.
b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner;
The sub-standard size of the Property was not the result of actions by the
landowner.The neighboring home to the east has lakeshore on two sides and
is set back a distance from the lake which is greater than most of the
surrounding homes resulting in the severe average lakeshore setback applied
to the Property;and
c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The lot width
variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. It does not appear
that the requested average lakeshore setback variance to permit the new home
and swimming pool will adversely impact views of the lake currently enjoyed
by the adjacent property owners.
Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be
granted as follows:
FILE#17-3950
17 July 2017
Page 4 of 5
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 and pool are allowed
uses 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 conforming lot area,yet substandard
lot width of the property is not uncommon in the surrounding neighborhood. The
extreme setback of the home on the adjacent property is not in character with the
immediate neighborhood.
9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which
the land is located. This property is unique because it has a non-lakeshore lot on the
west and the home on the lakeshore lot directly to the east is set back further than the
other immediately adjacent homes.
10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant.The majority of the property is encumbered
by the applied average lakeshore setback; to push the home further from the lake
would nearly eliminate lake views.
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 size of the Property; the
topography, wetland, and location of the adjacent home to the east 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
Staff has conducted a preliminary review of the proposed septic design and had deemed it
acceptable.A site evaluation and more detailed review will be done at the time of the building
permit.
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.
FILE#17-3950
17 July 2017
Page 5 of 5
Practical Difficulties Analysis
Staff finds the topography, lot size,wetland,and location of the adjacent home to the east create
practical difficulties supporting the requested variances.
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 is having the wetland on the property delineated.After approval by the MCWD the
survey will be updated and ready for permitting. Planning Staff recommends approval.
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A. Application
Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form
Exhibit C. Existing& Proposed Survey/Site Plan
Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations
Exhibit E. Submitted Hardcover Calculations
Exhibit F. Septic Design
Exhibit G. Property Owners List
Exhibit H. Plat Map
PC
Exhibit A
City of Orono #17-3950
Variance Application
Street Address: Application#
4 O A rO 2750 Kelley Parkway
�/ Orono,MN 55356 Date Received
Main: 952-249-4600 Staff
fax: 952-249-4616 Fee: $700
')!:\11
Mailing Address:
y P.O.Box 66 Escrow $700 / $2.500
�t G> Crystal Bay,MN 55323-0066 Notes
'kESH04�
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: I 1 i7 314O1EL'a AJ E )VL:
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
(attach additional sheets as necessary)
APPLICANT INFORM TION: ❑ eck h re if Applicant address should be used for billing
Applicant:
Phone(Primary): 17,- 2-1401 rf g
Mailing Address: 700 4 L T' !' City: �/ -T ZIP: 5 '5i.
Email: � • '�cl.h 7 rnj h-fir' rl O y-Gt�lLlf
PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: 0 check here if Property Owner is same as applicant
0 check here if Prope Owne ad rens should pe used for billing
Name: �I(, '1 , e M 1p"I A e LM f'C d
Phone(Primary): '�' (e 7-- q l — ' Z
Mailing Address: ?j Jy�j (n n ' -.
Email: m yJ Ivo co i Ai /. 4
1
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 distrib t d vi mil.
Applicant Signature: //0 1dCC "Date: `0 I I�
Applicant Signature: Date:
Property Owner Signature: 1 Date: 0(0 1� ' ZO 1
Property Owner Signature: - Date:
Variance Application-January 2017
Page 4
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.
P O ' t inetio,o,s
F--tiv\ c
First Middle Last
0-1t9 51". ve� b
Address
r3 ON 55991 a.° ) yf z - z
City State Zip Phone
I understand my rights as stated above.
411aAmina. i.skra 11111111/
Signature
Variance Application-January 2017
Page 14
PC •
Exhibit B
#17-3950
PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM
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."
Yes
2. "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner."
Yes
3. "The variance, if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality."
Correct. It will not
4. "Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use for the property exists
under the terms of the Zoning Chapter."
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."
This property is heavily wooded to the North and there is a pool proposed closer to the lake than the principal
structure,to the south where there will be sunlight.
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."
Variance Application-January 2017
Page 7
7. "The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family
dwelling."
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."
DuP to this property being shoreline property while the neighbors on either side are not(The Easterly neighbor's
prnpPrty fronts Tanager Bay.the opposite direction)the ordinance cannot be applied and a variance is the only
way to determine the setbacks.
10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right
of the applicant."
11. "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health,safety,comfort,morals,or in any other
respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code."
Correct, It will not
12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to
alleviate demonstrable difficulty."
Clearly this is the case
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):
Due to this property being shoreline property while the neighbors on either side are not(The Easterly neighbor's
property fronts Tanager Bay,the opposite direction)the ordinance cannot be applied and a variance is the only
way to determine the setbacks.
In addition the lot is very long and skinny preventing the owner from putting a pool on the side.
Variance Application—January 2017
Page 8
,
x_. Lxrcatvc xcusk
'-' , "2-: ,- .- -.• 1".' :"'"-'4 -A -et- -1-1--___
,
'
—
.
r', a . ,f-'',1,.
-- 5-- --- -
......___ i
..!....... .
_.....
. •-• '-- 0.,e ''--- : __
1 ' '''',-• 1-' -
--
—- - .
.. .-,
-.-..
-- .- .,0`2.—1.---
I I
I, I
NI
WETLAW
11
0 40 60 120
SCALE IN FEET
, 111.00 .nrceospu SPOT v EVATIP1 di
A., :CAIITLEVOED OW.011.10, 1§11
Oft .GAUGE 11.0011 11LEVA
.I. LE: DSC'::S"
iA::C.:S1:1:1:V'
iZZPNCUNT. N:
ADDES 1:60C .:7.14',",v,
,.. _, 3 ._.0,7
d$ei%J'
. Li t...,
\ .. ta 2”4"5----- LOT AREA 175800 Si/4.0 AC
." E ,4
-
A-. ill
•,...F....Et-....
-,.. () • Lu
VESURVET"::;°'46L"576.5'TBAC:S7W04ATCP‘C'74"3:CItYPE''
...Q.,• 1.1.1
Ct
j5) : ' Q C3
'- F!?; - .VErY l
OYUSOS AD
,_ .0764S*4044 NOUSE 0(4445.,
L.PP" Li-1- iil:
'• 1'&
�r t A
PC
^ �, • Exhibit C-2
* 'r TANAGER �° b a c #17-3950
i)1- ° ♦� ' v.. RAY
• '., -S.
a
�i i' �: s1
ia�e. � � ' Variance
Ift41 x y VII
gii, r Drawings
' '{ e. i :� i'" 20 June 2017
y •
410*.res �c.[iw
a
Mill .01
.. L
d '
n ' P
-44
,,„..
, ....
T '"7r-
N.RL + s v
C •' ve,'..e . *7. . ' -de..; . _ VS.^. ji. .,---- ... .... _al.\
. ! ra '' ° '`r..* V./ .44 x
f _
-0
; NOR SON
A ° *., SMITH'S 1
� , .F ,.' CUSTOM BUILDERS
..:
BAY OW' k"�
• �.
esKucHe
PROPOSED SITE OVERVIEW °F N EXISTING SITE
;-;.--1015....,- �'! •l ai �. ‘, .34„,,,
g rAT. o} � i` r i�A K. ," 4 r qi 1t i. ,W «, 1 I 60
'•i J .. fid' `Y E i" y�y� .I ,k+ 4
F fd i{Y ,Y S''� G' y, }`x
-44
t
h Shoreline Drive
y
......cN
M + d "� y � ', J xJ
', I.,
tiry - % �
• •
•
Variance
_ o
` "+1' � Drawings
•
I.
`': Y 20 June 2017
• b
+ 1 � � i 1 ,
a
ADJACENT
a " .� .'., ,w a > PRINCIPAL �._
f
\, `. 4, iti . STRUCTURE f.
f
•
•
'
- c
iir
1.
r r . 4 , N
r-a
.
4/
E
nt :. « ,i,. ADIACEn.T POOL ,I' S
w
i i
� � � ,. ' ADJACENT
� a � �,I I
PRINCIPAL �. � !
i
�y i wo
iii STRUCTURE! ,,.... Y r 5, i
ti L,aii • r, ,
x
PROPOSED HOME iL d i
Vii,-- '• `:
•
„ PROPOSED }' — R,•
-:.... {_.., .•„ .r. , POOL/PATIO f
R• i T
�* ; " , NOR- SON
" yM.
R "' CUSTOM BUILDERS
R . •' �w es He
. KUC
PROPOSED SITE OVERVIEW °F 5 "
PC
I 41 D Exhibit D
Shc #17-3950
u
POOL
12'X30' Ilea
IS
11--0 )
Variance
Drawings
El ei CI
PDS PDS
1 OPTION COVERED PORCHPDS 20 June 2017
CONOM 606 av
REAR
..., alir___„_\ ' STOOP ' .n-.... i .._. _ ... i_. _
0 ,.
S " -iAMIW— II DINING �� -
€ ra r "
.�ru�!_ _) •- °».. -, �Q ROOM to ,i 1
I o �, ' WOOD
ROOM
l ARAB Ga Y'vii� Y P t-f t—'1 Yf
Ci timoocsigia4 MI
( IaJ FOYER
KITCHEN
WOOD
ir.w'''' Q
_ weep woo°
weep COATS LL_, ,�
SHELVES
ILI3 ---166-------i—-.. -...i COVERED L�
- ` 4-- 3 ENTRY
II
NOR- SON
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN CUSTOM BUILDERS
TYP.CEILING HEIGHT=10'-4W
APPROX.S.F.=1,646 FIN.+915 GARAGE es K u c H e
.,. l l , ill „ ARA
0• r V 6• 6' IN IF 16' 16•
GRAPHIC SCALE D E S I G N
1/4"=1'-0"SCALE(24"x36"PAPER)
1760
Shoreline Drive
Variance
Drawings
20 June 2017
OPTION INSWING OPDON INSWING 0•11.4 NSW,. OPT.INSWING
RCN CLAY ROI FRON ORM
dtMA
14 /�*�I i t_ e j t�
. _
III --_. FROOM 3•^! , -BEDROOM 2 Cu.rz-- _ CUP,.o "XL- ',m,,rv.
.... /ao u tu
�� —CLIP SW - �— � r OWNERS 'L7'
ar rx
• I _ �I'. — OWNER'S - - BATH
I T f — BEDROOM Com.,,
. 1.rr CCM..
W.I. W.I 17_ a.rer _.
C
O II BATH 3
BATH 2 LINE _
UPPER "0
-A' = HIS' L NIL—
OPTION WOOD — GRIP
_II ! ! W.I. 1r r UPPER — II I I III
MECHANICAL -' _ II'1
R \ HEER'S
BEDRi•M4/ — CLOSET 1-
S UDY l LAUNDRri. &
Ma O
STAIR
w000
NOR— SON
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN CUSTOM BUILDERS
p
TYP.CEILINGHEIGHT=9'-1 X" OS K U C H e
APPROX.OX.S.F.S =, , , FIN.
O. r 1 a• r la a• u• /a
GRAPHIC SCALE DESIGN
1/4"=1'.O"SCAI F 124"06"PAPFRI
1760
Shoreline Drive
Variance
Drawings
20 June 2017
1
GAMES/
nDIA T EXERCISE
n rGPL . ) ".=',.
•
\\ $ •
*
MECHANICAL/
UNEXCAVATED/ STORAGE ir ;(
BACKFILL DROP"OM
O "
{ ¢,. BAR _ BEDROOM 5
- - - user
". i
a<e1.,.:t,'-'::e. I_ A II
_, ,
Ee nignnLin
1 Imo—
; STAIR
NOR- SON
OPTION TO FINISH CUSTOM BUILDERS
LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN e s K uc H e
TYP.CEILING HEIGHT=8'•7 1/2"
APPROX.S.F.=1,,133 43
FIN.+ 4 MECH/STORAGE D f S I G N
o• i• e• la IS' If Id'
GRAPHIC SCALE
- . 1 760
;.vw�riam�sir imarrow rrmw�tacumm 'raiiii..... .r _
lainumoragrataas .-�-- ----' Shoreline Drive
_,._._.:�.�.. ..�..� ,�.�,.a.�.� �. ..�r __.._ �,�.,>✓-,r,-,-.-ate--�
e
•
...t-. .--.,. , pir,......-„,- . ,
— -- - = Variance
� � Drawings
, fir 20 June 2017
.,. oi .r-.. i� '2* .iw ,� �, ?��� ..•� feurooc- .-
NORTH ELEVATION
.,n
,, SCALE.1/8" = 1'-0"
''-fl .an..o..
. a.p
, I
1
t> "
NOR- SON
_far
CUSTOM BUILDERS
` a esKucHe
..
DESIGN
SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0"
U9) N
•0 a) C
_ 0
— 0 z
03
IN = a .
c
a 42
0 .
0 " —
0
o >
-C D
4 0 0
,.,...„,„:::,„ -"--- --1 Tionvitailtioi- -------------------1
., „ ,,,, „„ , .,, „ ,,..3,•, .. ..,-,,:w.r.; '::-.0 -11.41iPlairilli1111, ' ••••- '-'•-•, ' '.•'''-•;-'I
,-- --•„" -.:
. . , .. .__. ... . _ .
0111 '1'`i,-.,t7-:1..i.4i,',-,,:..-7-0.:,-.': - .,i 0, I-.•\,r, .- ii iii,it li:ill i -,.-
-- r ,I. ,.!. • or,..,.,• ....i
,?..1 ,,,,,_.,..,,,,,„1 1111111110 00 i '":-
---
:\
'- q Ill'071,71111.fIllii 1
!
PITITIIMITrfl '
... V"i.'" ,) ,' q
rr.: 11...;;;I:ti
-,
.,
,
E 1 1 Iiiii, .: -'-''-''.. -:::, 'i.s.-::::.'LTA.:.,:' : ',2.- :::, . ili f ' 9-
P 1, 1.1i1114- ,'-. r.---',..:,:'.• ' - ' ..,
0
p INV foi,,,,„„, ...:„ .... ,....., :- .. . :... P
r.' IlY 10:11 I 1,4010:10. ''-:2 -- -,/,':; - - - - -•-•
9,-e'
i pitoktoill„ - •L'- = , •-•-:- - '" r' ---
'1 ll ril IStliii 41'1119111rik ' '.; ''''• ''''' ••• r ••• ,..- • -„.:.-,._ - •--22*
1, ''',;.-:444
k 1.!,1 fiei olipoili,l,l4, ---',•-,' -.- ,':.'.' '":''.:''1:T:.'1' ''.::-..';. ;.'''' 4 , 1 i'
L'Il L'j.•
14,,,, ,,ni,
4 ri I 1 iiiirir iphilr•',41. ,.. '.., '. F'.-':44—k;-7'il Yk,4111, ti,dt
1 I -: Hifi difilli: -.
' till i 11111#11100 r J- •
1 till i h ..,-----,
i4,11,40 41,,1110! '-... :•,--
ifietiii0Nctibil4flii! - - ' , •,,,.;-6•,*.-ItiXpbooqi01443,t' %r--
. _, ._ i 1 JAI illiiii6;;':•ligihili -, . . ' ,, ,,- r-?-4,- ,1; ,,!' -• •-'4111r1IP:•0 'i -'' ion
'.i.,1:Lr'' ' 1POPPOliiiii, . ' '
, .f. Il f 41,350.
:
N .
'i''1 11
I r e,'114:0..1-i i
I it-PlittiiziNs,1 i i i i
1 "4111hti!i '4; I ' i i
,1 4 I 11 IlliTikii,, ,••,4i; , i i
i
i i
, , 111 1,1101141011•Yiti - i i i i i
,.1 IP 4!,i.okdow, ,
4 et ipowilliTi 0 ,_ i i i i i i
A 2 II 1 1 1
P i i
i i i i i ii
0,'.1 104E;1.. <
> . . . . . ..
. . . ..
,.... .11, 114,1m4. LL,
. . . . . ..
L... .r.
kr 4huipi, .7,..,
14 • a a a
:,:,-,: —
'' ttielfir,I.”irIOrrWqr t .7 '
a °I
' 2
II )1 ilz,1-1 . Ln lJ = 1 a
i 01/LC..0.
I I
' li 1 1 lif.qh40!
IIle 1 loPitIli,:tii i i
I Ii I 1114IW'
i'' hi 54Apiiili!440.,
0 , ,
" filiiilb!!;11T1011,4,.,(11 ' I
-' 1.1 :ik it,IR iirlf,f4 i‘0 ,J „
',2: h`01k1 iiihpilli:'• , .
t.' 11 rop Igi,o1,fII
•
of- i!, 01.11111N g --I -.
i
i Ail i ku 1,0.01 . _...±.....,,:,......_, :
— Pii k el iRiiizis. -
r . ..
r lo. - Oil ii, °Willi- A i •-. ----
4
..'2,.•
---
I I I I II I
i i i i i ii I
i i i i i ii I
i i i i i
i i i i i III
i i i i i ii i
i i i i i ii i
i i i i i ii i
i i i i i Ii i
I i i i i ii i
4 i 4 i i a f
g• t :
., i
PC
City of Orono Exhibit E
40�,o Hardcover Calculation Worksheet #17-3950
Property Address: 1760 Shoreline Drive
`'Kcsr,o" Prepared by: Nor-Son Date: 20 June 2017
Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) 4RIMP 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 Gravel Drive 300 S.F.
B S.F.
C S.F.
D S.F.
E S.F.
F S.F.
G S.F.
H S.F.
S.F.
J S.F.
K S.F.
L S.F.
M S.F.
N S.F.
O S.F.
P S.F.
Q S.F.
R S.F.
S.F.
T S.F.
S.F.
✓ S.F.
W S.F.
X S.F.
Y S.F.
Z S.F.
(1) Total Existing Hardcover L300 S.F. 1
Excludable Hardcover(See City Code Sec 78-1684):
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
(2) Total Excludable Hardcover S.F.J
(3) Net Existing Hardcover [Subtract line(2)from line(1)] 300 S.F.
(4) Total Lot Area 175,175 S.F.
Existing Hardcover Percentage [(3)_(4)] 0
(Proposed Hardcover next page)
Variance Application—January 2017
Page 11
City of Orono
Hardcover Calculation Worksheet
Property Address: 1760 Shoreline Drive
t�'rFSHOQ'� Prepared by: Nor-Son Date: 20 June 2017
Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) 4412P 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 Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Total
Survey (Square Feet)
(Example)_ (Garage) _ (24'x 30') _ _ (72.0 S.F.)
A HOUSE/GARAGE
2,536 S.F.
B PORCH 407 S.F.
C TERRACE(incl pool) 1,845 _ S.F.
D ENTRY PATH 300 S.F.
E DRIVE 3751 S.F.
F EXISTING DRIVE TO REMAIN 300 S.F.
G S.F.
H S.F.
S.F.
J S.F.
K 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 Proposed Hardcover 9,139 S.F.
Excludable Hardcover(See City Code Sec 78-1684):
EXISTING DRIVE TO REMAIN 300 S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
(2) Total Excludable Hardcover S.F.
(3) Net Proposed Hardcover [Subtract line(2)from line(1)] '9,139 S.F.
(4) Total Lot Area 175,175 S.F.
Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3)+(4)] 5.2
Variance Application—January 2017
Page 12
•
PC
Exhibit F
#17-3950
Joseph Olson D.B.A.
Rusty Olson's--Soil and Percolation Testing
Joseph J. Olson--MPCA License#810
11481 Riverview Rd. NE, Hanover,MN 55341
(763) 498-8779 Fax (763) 498-8290
July 7,2017
NOR-SON
1760 Shoreline Drive
Orono, Hennepin County
This on-site Sewage Treatment System is designed for a Type 1,five-bedroom home in accordance with
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Chapter 7080 and local ordinances.
The periodically saturated soils were located at 24-26 inches(mottled soil). Due to the periodically
saturated soils,a pressurized mound system with 6 inches of rock will need to be installed to treat the septic
effluent.The bottom of the treatment area must be located at least 3'above the saturated soils.This system
is designed with 6 inches of rock.
The soils at a depth of 12"have a percolation rate averaging 3 MPI.
The west property line must be staked prior to the installation of the system.
A 2250-gallon septic tank is designed for this site.All tanks need to be insulated if there is less than two
feet of cover over the top of the tanks.Clean outs must be installed on the end of the laterals for
maintenance.
Use 7/32 inch perforations on the laterals.
A Darwin 1300 gallon pumping chamber will need to be installed to lift the effluent to the treatment area.
The power supply and switches must be located outside the manhole and pumping chamber in a
weatherproof enclosure.A warning device must be installed with light and sound devices;this is in case of
a pump failure. A flow measurement device must be installed. Including but not limited to a water meter,
event counter, running time clocks or electronically controlled dosing.
Keep all heavy equipment off of the proposed treatment areas before.during and after construction.
The area around both sites must be fenced off by the contractor before any construction begins.
With proper installation and maintenance,this system should have no problem in treating septic effluent
effectively. Nothing other than gray water,(laundry, showers,etc.)Human water and toilet tissue should be
disposed of into the septic tanks.Garbage disposals are not recommended.Additives must not be used they
may cause harmful damage to your septic system. It is recommended that you pump the septic tanks every
two years.
S. ely,
Joseph J. Olson
. .-- ,. .' •
• ' '''''' ,.
. I ,I. ..,•-'..-
.
, • I
. \
1 ,_ . ..
, .
,r.c . 1 4:,.- •,„?...4.,;,,:..._
it .'
' .
.PROPOSEDjisa .0. ,.
I RESDINCE,
-1 WE..,9865 - '''''-....?., I
' SW ../'"---.--- t ,-
10 1
.-...... e
..----- ,.... . ...
__ ---
N• ,..., rams-- - ...,..1.
———
r 1 --......
__---- P POOL Orar • — ----- '---
- - -- -- .
. -lc •S•C P Le: A.'-..--•S-CI
.-------
--.101120XINIAJI .... '` ----1-
.7.,..reo....ads,A-.....--4-am-,-=.1.7,.•* It
_._.... i
•___.. -- - -----.-
•
___. ,_ ...._ ---• _-... ------.--
•Gt 1
..--••••-
_-- -- 1-..."
v.I— - - - - - - -_ -- —
t? --
'4 1
• ---
-.
- EDGE LAWN
I
-71.
.,..s c t t f.._-St- li 1
-----i----------1'..- 1,4E- 1 1
.-.._. --•-i_.,:...7---- C1'. ...- ---4--- --.--`4-
____.-.
...--...
--- ---0
/
i
--.......-- -__:- - ---- ----
.... i
...
CA
.-- ---- -:_•__---_-_..- • 05S I -4 "
:5°16.0`11DSC ,
i
o 1 x S.,,
....._... esi
..,
— - -- -- ---00 . 14-. ... .. .
_...i.... ___ _ __._. 7, ,. 0)
r __
,
1101,1,..mor - .
3 0•I 110 -.A -------C),...
*5'' - '•_:..7"4 --- •;ipMVP. . gruy, ., 0 -
r tr
-- ''' .•.;?!...:._.. /, . ,._... 1 5_,, i _ --_,.,_ .
' 411
,....._
.,
, G ...,
-
... .._ 1 .
. ., ,
, —
-- -,
-.... _
_-
— — _ __ _ __ — _-
f-,,,,,„i ...,IF
1 .'•• ----
_.--- • --.,
_..---- _______--. - --;4=-,77:-
---L'--- ----i - SBL +/
,_,..
I -----__ ----.
____ ---------- ,5 wETLAND
...__ .
-.-- T --------- EASkiit
•r °
a c r° C 2 W.
IS
A) b' 0. o a°
F-- Z . = a •
_ .p •0 W J `/I: C .0 i k .=
{
m• I a l '� ren ? f
kr P.a. OMi s.1 :0.., C 4
F
5' �°x' 1`-) L C 9i A ; t
r •C �<., N �•.L 0/ r i r
w .• _ ; r.
C 4" n W a) c iii r
3 P. g ir4 '7" g" ;-- '-' ' / . i .
cu
I� •
ri 1
i *,i.! "i -°II/ r 1. ii a
,...;
'
g �+` g
I� ,C g Cn 1 'ill N4 ^ i wr s
14 li $i
E. y
-R , ,_ % F i s; ' :
L!X ±_ I j
10 i� 1
• 12.
4 °i
S tt'r l' s if 1
o7/ ,- -.13
Pts /
1x * I - ! \\I":"
[ii N -2 F. ig g i I
, ...xi E .--ff sa• i -e, ;II' l< , .
.I. "C": 1 i::, .. 41, ; 2 P. ic.;, . ,_q St fi
I.
8 •
, c.. ' ir 181 ril
..„.. r, • Ilb PP PP g t
ND
P r q 5' i . 8 •11//10 ,y
`t3 '6' i
a vAl I v" it it eft rt-t
• ., . r- ti' I ?
I "', , r {,r r I j 17
A -4 ,. a v W .. ,.o ioQ / (gyp
S
! KSS I °
iii
r
i
2011 purple code Mound Design
www.Sept,cResource.com (vers 15.2)
Property Owner: NOR-SON Date: 7/7/2017
Site Address: 1760 Shoreline Drive PID: 1011723140017
Comments:
instructions: =enter data = adjust if desired = computer calculated - DO NOT CHANGE!
I 5 bedroom Type I Residential System
2) 750 GPD design flow
? Yes Garbage disposal or pumped to septic 50%larger tank with multiple comp/tanks
a, 2250 Gal Septic tank (code minimum) r 2250 Gal Septic tank (design size / LUG req'd)
Tank options: none
5, 1.2 GPD/ft2 mound sand loading rate contour loading rate of 12 req's a min 62.5 ft. long rockbed
6) 10.0 ft rockbed width 63.0 ft rockbed length
? 3.0 ft lateral spacing 3.0 ft perforation spacing (maximum of 3 for both)
end feed manifold connection
8, 3 laterals 61.0 feet long 21.0 perfs / lateral 63 perfs total
(1/2 a perf means the first perf starts at the middle feed manifold)
7/32 inch perfs at 1 feet residual head gives 0.56 gpm flow rate per perforation
for this perf size Ex spacing, a pipe size on line 12, max perfs/lateral= 30 , line#8 must be less --> OK
lo, 4.0 doses per day (4 minimum)
I 11 188 gallons per dose (treatment volume)
2.00 5x
i_') 2.00 inch diameter laterals must be used to meet"4x pipe volume"requirement
2.00 3x
13, 30 feet of 2.0 inch supply line leads to 5 gallons of drainback volume
(Tip: "top feed"manifold to control the drainback)
141 193 gallons TOTAL pump out volume (treatment+ drainback)
15, 8 feet vertical lift from pump to mound laterals, leads to a:
ib) 36 GPM® 15 feet of head, Pump requirement (note: >50gpm may require an extra 3-6'of head)
17, 750 gal Dose tank (code minimum) 1300 gal Dose tank (design size / LUG req'd) at 25.49 gpi
leads to a
iso 7.6 inch swing on Demand float, or timed dosing of 5.4 min ON (confirm pump rate with drawdown
(this delivers Average flow, =70%of Peak design flow) 9 hrs OFF test and adjust as necessary)
19) 12 inches from bottom of tank to"Pump OFF"float
20, 20 inches from bottom of tank to"Pump ON"float, or 12 inches to"Timer ON"float if time dosed
2 1) 23 inches from bottom of tank to"Hi Level"float, or 33 inches to"Hi Level"float if time dosed
22, 714 gallons reserve capacity (after High Level Alarm is activated)
2.3, 0.78 gpd/ft2 Absorption area Soil Loading Rate, which gives a mound ratio of 1.5 (minimum)
(this must match the soil boring log) desired mound ratio 1.5
241 12 percent site slope (0-20% range) 15 (%downslope site slope, if different than upslope)
,, 24 inches, or 2.0 ft. to Redox or other limiting condition (need at least 12"to be a Type I)
Treatment zone contains 0 inches of 0%soil credit, and 0 inches of 50%soil credit. Giving a:
26, 12 inch, or 1.0 ft. Sand Lift Mound CRITICAL FOR FUTURE CERTIFICATIONS!!!
27) 15.0 ft.Total ABSORPTION width (with sand beyond rockbed as follows:)
2 ) 0.0 ft. upslope and sideslope
5.0 ft. Downslope
Individual slope ratios give BERM widths (topsoil beyond rockbed)of:
29) 4:1 upslope ratio 8 ft. upslope berm
3u) 3:1 sideslope 13 ft. sideslope berms
31, 3:1 downslope 23 ft. downslope berm
32, Overall Dimensions: 10.0 ft. wide by 63.0 ft. long Rock bed
41 ft. wide by 89 ft. long Mound footprint
4" inspection pipe
18" cover on top
{Upslope berm 8 .E Downslope berm 23
--�, 12" cover on sides
(6"loamy cap&6"topsoil)
1.0 Clean sand lift
2.0 ., ., .
l.;miting Cc i
Absorption Width ( 15.0 I
Note: r
For 0 to 1%slopes, Absorption Width is measured from the Bedequally in both directions.
For slopes >1%, Absorption Width is measured downhill from the upslope edge of the Bed.
33) Rock Bed:
10.0 ft. by 63.0 ft. by 6 inches under pipe, plus 20%gives 21 yd'or*1.4= 29 ton
341 Mound Sand: (note: volume is based on 3:1/4:1 slope from top of rockbed, Exchange sand for loamy cap if desired)
16.2 up + 87.4 downslope + 11.4 ends + 37.3 under rock= 183 yd'or"1.4= 256 ton
plus 20%
35, Loamy Cap:
37 ft. by 85 ft. 6"deep, plus 20%gives 70 yd'or*1.4= 98 ton
36, Topsoil:
41 ft. by 89 ft. 6"deep, plus 20%gives 82 yd'or•1.4= 115 ton
I hereby certify that I have completed this work in accordance with all applicable ordinances, rules and laws.
Rusty olson's Soil Et Perc 810 7/7/2017
esigner Signature Company License# Date
Installer Summary
2250 gallon Septic tank (minimum) Tank options: none
aux larger LanK wiur rnuurp►e cornpi Lwiss
1300 gallon Dose tank (minimum) at 25.49 gpi
36 GPM @ 15 ft. of head, Pump required
7.6 inch swing on Demand float which translates to roughly 4.8 inches of float tether length
if time dosing is required --> 5.4 minutes ON time li 9 hours OFF time
20 inches from bottom of tank to"pump ON"float, or 12 inches to"timer ON"float
23 inches from bottom of tank to"Hi Level Alarm"or 33 inches to"Hi level alarm"if time dosed
30 ft. of 2.0 inch supply line with end feed manifold connection
(Tip: "top feed"manifold to control drainback)
12 inch, or 1.0 ft. Sand Lift Mound
10.0 ft. wide by 63.0 ft. long Rock bed
3 laterals 2.00 inch diameter 61.0 ft. tong 3.0 ft. lateral spacing
7/32 inch perfs 3.0 ft. perforation spacing
No Effluent filter a alarm
3 clean out lx valve box assemblies
15.0 ft.Total sand ABSORPTION width (minimum)
0.0 ft. upslope and sidestope (sand beyond rockbed, minimum)
5.0 ft. Downslope !sand beyond rockbed, minimum;
Specific slope ratios give BERM widths (topsoil beyond rockbed)of:
4:1 upslope ratio 8 ft. upslope berm
3:1 sideslope 13 ft. sideslope berms
3:1 downslope 23 ft. downslope berm
4" inspection pipe
18" cover on top
<Upslope berm 8 a ,< Downslope berm 23 '
12" cover on sides
• (6"loamy cap do 6"topsoil)
1.0 Clean sand lift
2.0 ), f r')
lc
Absorption Width 15.0 .
Note:
For 0 to 1%slopes, Absorption Width is measured from the Bedequally in both directions.
For slopes >1%, Absorption Width is measured downhill from the upslope edge of the Bed.
Rock Bed: 21.0 yd3 or*1.4= 29 ton 6 inches under pipe
Mound Sand: 183 yd3 or"1.4= 256 ton calculation based on 3:1/4:1 slope from top of rockbe
Loamy Cap: 70 yd3 or"1.4= 98 ton 6"deep
Topsoil: 82 yd3 or"1.4= 115 ton 6"deep
INSPECTOR CHECKLIST - mound
1/6U shoreline Unve
n 11T1 I setbacks: 20'to pressure tested sewer tine (5 psi for 15 min)
_ 50'to everything 100'to dispersal area with shallow well
PROPFR I Y LIVES setback: 10'to everything
Road setback: platted: 10'prop line. Metes & bounds: out of road easement, or outer ditch.
LAKE 131,1'EI' setback: 20'for bluff. Lakes: GD_, RD_, NE_. Protected wetland_.
Building setbacks: 10'for everything, 20'for dispersal area.
WATER LINE under pressure sc 10'to bed,tank&sewer line. (else sewer line > 12"below)
nSewer line & baffle connection (no 90's, 3'between 45's, slope min 1"in 8', max 2" in 8')
(no depth req's, clean out every 100', Sch 40 pipe)
nSeptic tank and risers (water tight, insulated, proper depth, existing verified by pumping)
mfg._ 2250 gallons none
Riser over outlet, riser over inlet or center, and 6"+ inspection pipe over any remaining baffles.
No effluent filter E alarm
_ Dose tank risers and piping (water tight, insulated, proper depth, drainback)
mfR 1300 gallons
E dose pump 36 gpm 15 head VERIFY PUMP CURVE 5.4 min ON 9 hr OFF
0 float setting drop 7.6 inches at 25.5 gpi "DESIGNED" 4.8 inches approx float tether length
193.0 gal dose divided by gpi "INSTALLED" = inches float drop (field corrected
LABEL pump requirements and drawdown on riser or panel
Cam lock reachable from grade- 30"max. J-hook weep hole. Supply line access (no hard 90's)
~_ 2.0 inch supply pipe: Sch40, sloped 1/8"+, supported by 4"sch40 sleeve or compacted, and buried 6"+.
splice box / control panel / electrical connections
flow measurement: CT, ETM, time dosed, home water meter
mound absorption area rough up
mound rock dimensions 10.0 X 63.0
Sand lift depth 12 inches. (Jar test : 2"sand leaves < 1/8"silt after 30 min)
n Absorption Sand beyond rock 0.0 upslope 5.0 downslope
Bermed topsoil beyond rockbed 8 upslope 13 sideslope 23 downslope
cover depth of 12-18"+ VERIFY
3 laterals (1-2'from edge of rock)
2.00 inch pipe size (Sch40 pipe Et fittings)
3.0 ft lateral spacing
_ 7/32 inch perforations
3.0 ft perforation spacing
Air inlet at end of laterals, and at top feed manifold if necessary. VERIFY
clean outs (no hard 90's)
4"inspection pipe to bottom of rock, anchored VERIFY
Abandon existing system - if necessary Re-use existing tank certification
_ monitoring plan and type
well abandonment form - if necessary
System Elevations
benchmark r
r - - - - SHWT
Mound 1
(Grade elevations are existing. If a loamy cap
different final grade is desired it should lateral
be shown and described here.)
bottom rock
grade (at ("slope rock bed)
SHWT (at upslope rock bed)
1 1 1 1 ,
j____":1"1114111.1"111161611M*11116. 611611111"11....."1"116181.1..militilalatildit"till"kgill""Allelimill"1411"12116, _____7-1. I
i — :
r r
C7
Sewer pipe
I 1 r
exiting house Septic Tank Septic Tank (ir apptkabte) Pump Tank
Grade Grade Grade Grade
Pipe inlet inlet inlet
Tank bottom Tank bottom Tank bottom
Soil Observation Log
v.'. . cpticRcsource.com vers 12.4
Owner Information
Property Owner;project: NOR-SON Date 7/5/2017
Property Address 'PID: 1760 Shoreline Drive
Soil Survey Information ❑refer to attached soil survey
Parent marl's: ❑Till ❑ Outwash E Lacustrine ❑Alluvium ❑Organic ❑Bedrock
landscape position: ❑Summit E Shoulder E Side slope ❑Toe slope
soil survey map units: L22D2 slope 12 % direction-Linear
Soil Log#1
❑ Boring E Pit Elevation 948.5 Depth to SHWT 26 Inches
Depth(in) Texture fragment°'o matrix color redox color consistence grade shape
0-8 Topsoil <35 10yr3'2 Loose Loose Single grain
8-16 Sandy Loam <35 10yT4/3 Friable Loose Granular
16-26 Sandy Loam <35 10yT5 4 Friable Loose Granular
26-30 Sandy Loam <35 10yr5'4 I0y4'8.1-6 10y Friable Loose Granular
<35 loose loose single grain
friable weak granular blocks
35-50
>50 firm moderate prismatic plat)
rigid strong massive
Comments:
1760 Shoreline Drive Soil Log#2
❑Boring E Pit Elevation 948.5 Depth to SH WT 26 Inches
Depth(in) Texture fragment 90 matrix color redox color consistence grade shape
i)-S Topsoil 35 10vr= 2 Loose Loose Single grain
8-14 Sandy Loam , 35 I U�r-4 3 Friable Loose Granular
14-26 Sandy Loam <35 111r5 4 Friable Loose Granular
26-30 Sands clay Loam • 35 I(1, r5 4 1 U.4'8,1-6/10y Friable Loose Granular
1760 Shoreline Drive Soil Log #3
❑ Boring U Pit Elevation 943.0 Depth to SHWT 24 Inches
Depth(in) Texture fragment 91) matrix color redox color consistence grade shape
0-8 Topsoil <35 10yr3/2 Loose Loose Single grain
8-14 Sandy Loam <35 I0yr4/3 Friable Loose Granular
14-24 Sandy Loam <35 10yr5,4 Friable Loose Uromiiar
-24-30 Sands cla. Loam <35 IOyr5/4 I 0y4/8,I-6/l0y Friable Loose i granular
I hereby cert•this work was completed in accordance with MN 7080 and any local req's.
Rusty Olson's Soil & Pere. 810
tgner Signature Company License#
1760 Shoreline Drive Soil Log#4
❑ Boring E Pit Elevation 943.0 Depth to SHWT 26 Inches
Depth(in) Texture fragment% matrix color redox color consistence grade shape
0-8 Topsoil <35 10'r3 2 Loose Loose Single grain
8-14 Sands Loam 7,5 Ilk r4 3 Friable I (ranular
14-26 Sandy Loam 7,5 10)r5 -1 Friable Loose Granular
26-30 Sandy Loam 35 I0)r5 4 10y4/8,1-6/l0y Friable Loose (iranular
30-36 Clay Loam 35 III)r5 4 10y4/8,1-6/10y 1 riable Strong ltloek�
1760 Shoreline Drive Soil Log#5
E Boring ❑Pit Elevation 947.2 Depth to SHWT _ _ _ 26 Inches
Depth i in) Texture fragment% matrix color redox color consistence grade shape
0-8 Topsoil '35 10yr3 2 Loose Loose ‘,Inalc grain
8-16 Sand\ Loam 35 10\r4 3 Friable Loose ( ranular
16-26 Sandy Loam ..35 10)r5 4 Friable Loose (rmular
26-30 Sandy Loam <35 10yr5i4 10y4/8,1-6/10y Friable Loose l,ran uIar
<35 loose loose single grain
! 35-50 friable weak granular blocky
firm moderate prismatic platy
>50 massive
rigid strong
I hereby certify this work was completed in accordance with MN 7080 and any local rey's.
Rusty Olson's Soil & Perk:. 810
designer Signature Company License#
Soil Observation Log
wNsss.SepticResource.com errs 12.4
Owner Information
Property Owner project: NOR-SON Date 7/5/2017
Property Address ' PID: 1760 Shoreline Drive
Soil Survey Information ❑refer to attached soil survey
Parent mall's: 2 Till ❑Outwash ❑ Lacustnne ❑Alluvium ❑Organic ❑ Bedrock
landscape position: ❑ Summit ❑Shoulder C Side slope ❑Toe slope
soil survey map units: L22D2 slope 12 °,o direction- Linear
Soil Log#6
❑ Boring ❑ Pit Elevation 941.3 Depth to SHWT 26 Inches
Depth(in) Texture fragment% matrix color redox color consistence grade shape
0-8 Topsoil <35 I Oyr3.2 Loose Loose Single grain
8-14 Sandy Loam <35 I0yr4i3 Friable Loose Granular
14-26 Sandy Loam <35 10yr5/4 Friable Loose Granular
26-30 Sandy clay Loam <35 I0yr5%4 10y4,'8.1-6'10y Friable Loose Granular
<35 loose loose single grain
35 50 friable weak granular blocky
ASO firm moderate prismatic platy
rigid strong massive
Comments:
Percolation Test Data Sheet
Lic.#810
Percolating test readings made by: Rusty Olson's Perc. starting at 10:35 A.M. On 7/06/17
Location: 1760 Shoreline Drive
Hole number: 1
Date hole was prepared: 7/05/17
Depth of hole bottom_12"__inches, Diameter of hole_6"_inches.
Soil data from test hole:
Depth, inches Soil texture
0-8 Topsoil 10yr3/2
8-12 Sandy loam 10yr4/3
Method of scratching side wall: Knife
Depth of gravel in bottom of hole 2 inches:
Date of initial water filling 7/05/17 depth of initial water filling 12 inches above the hole bottom
Method used to maintain at least 12 inches of water depth in hole for at least 4 hours Automatic Siphon
Maximum water depth above hole bottom during tests 6 inches
Time Time Depth Drop in H2O Perc Rate
10:47 11:02 6" 4.5 3.3
11:09 11:24 6" 4.4 3.4
11:25 11:40 6" 4.3 3.5
AVERAGE PERC. RATE 3.4 MPI
Percolation Test Data Sheet
Lic.#810
Percolating test readings made by: Rusty Olson's Perc. starting at 10:35 A.M. On 7/06/17
Location: 1760 Shoreline Drive
Hole number: 2
Date hole was prepared: 7/05/17
Depth of hole bottom_12"_inches. Diameter of hole_6"_inches.
Soil data from test hole:
Depth, inches Soil texture
0-8 Topsoil 10yr3/2
8-12 Sandy loam 10yr4/3
Method of scratching side wall: Knife
Depth of gravel in bottom of hole 2 inches:
Date of initial water filling 7/05/17 depth of initial water filling 12 inches above the hole bottom
Method used to maintain at least 12 inches of water depth in hole for at least 4 hours Automatic Siphon
Maximum water depth above hole bottom during tests 6 inches
I Time Time Depth Drop in H2O Perc Rate
10:48 11:03 6" 5.5 2.7
11:08 11:23 6" 5.5 2.7
11:26 11:41 6" 5.5 2.7
AVERAGE PERC. RATE 2.7 MPI
Percolation Test Data Sheet
Lic.#810
Percolating test readings made by' Rusty Olson's Perc. starting at 10:35 A.M. On 7/06/17
Location: 1760 Shoreline Drive
Hole number: 3
Date hole was prepared: 7/05/17
Depth of hole bottom_12"_inches, Diameter of hole_6"_inches.
Soil data from test hole:
Depth, inches Soil texture
0-8 Topsoil 10yr3/2
8-12 Sandy loam 10yr4/3
Method of scratching side wall: Knife
Depth of gravel in bottom of hole 2 inches:
Date of initial water filling 7/05/17 depth of initial water filling 12 inches above the hole bottom
Method used to maintain at least 12 inches of water depth in hole for at least 4 hours Automatic Siphon
Maximum water depth above hole bottom during tests 6 inches
Time Time Depth Drop in H2O Perc Rate
10:49 11:04 6" 4.7 3.1
11:07 11:22 6" 4.6 3.2
11:27 11:42 6" 4.8 3.3
AVERAGE PERC. RATE 3.2 MPI
Percolation Test Data Sheet
Lic.#810
Percolating test readings made by: Rusty Olson's Perc. starting at 10:35 A.M. On 7/06/17
Location: 1760 Shoreline Drive
Hole number: 4
Date hole was prepared: 7/05/17
Depth of hole bottom_12"_inches, Diameter of hole_6"_inches.
Soil data from test hole:
Depth, inches Soil texture
0-12 Topsoil 10yr3/2
Method of scratching side wall: Knife
Depth of gravel in bottom of hole 2 inches:
Date of initial water filling 7/05/17 depth of initial water filling 12 inches above the hole bottom
Method used to maintain at least 12 inches of water depth in hole for at least 4 hours Automatic Siphon
Maximum water depth above hole bottom during tests 6 inches
I Time Time Depth Drop in H2O Perc Rate
10:50 11:05 6" 4.5 3.3
11:06 11:21 6" 4.4 3.4
11:28 11:43 6" 4.3 3.5
AVERAGE PERC. RATE 3.4 MPI
•
PC
Exhibit G
RUN DATE:06/02/2017 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) PAGE:I #17-3950
38 10-117-23 11 0004 38 10-117-23 13 0023 38 10-117-23 42 0002
I I.JACOBS,A JACOBS REV TRST WOODHOUSE SHORELINE LLC TASHITAA T TUFAA
980 HERITAGE LA 1800 SHORELINE.DR 1830 SHORELINE.DR
ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391
IRWIN L JACOBS WOODHOUSE SHORELINE LI.0 TASHITAA TUFAA
ALEXANDRA JACOBS 600 HIGHWAY 169 S 0701 1830 SHORELINE DR
1700 SHORELINE DR MINNEAPOLIS MN 55426 ORONO MN 55391
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 10-117-23 12 0005 38 10-117-23 13 0024
KELLY B KRONER WOODHOUSE SHORELINE LLC
1005 HERITAGE LA 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 00000
KELLY B KROMER WOODHOUSE SHORELINE LLC
1005 HERITAGE LA 600 HIGHWAY 169 S 0701
WAYZATA MN 55391 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55426
38 10-117-2313 0002 38 10-117-2314 0005
K L RISCHE&D A ZIEGLER DENNIS L LIBBY
1180 HERITAGE LA 1000 HERITAGE LA
ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391
KELLY L RISCHE DENNIS L LIBBY
DAVID A ZIEGLER 1000 HERITAGE LA
1180 HERITAGE LA WAYZATA MN 55391
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 10-117-23 13 0003 38 10-117.23 14 0016
R M MITHUN&R M MITIIUN TRST C NELSON&R W NELSON
1160 HERITAGE LA 1780 SHORELINE DR
ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391
RAYMOND MITHUN ROBERT&CAROLYN NELSON
1160 HERITAGE I.A 500 SE 5TH AVE UNIT S802
WAYZATA MN 55391 BOCA RATON FL 33432
38 10-117-23 13 0004 38 10-117.23 14 0017
ANTHONY A NICKLOW WOODHOUSE SHORELINE LLC
1150 HERITAGE LA 1760 SHORELINE DR
ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391
ANTHONY A NICKLOW WOODHOUSE SHORELINE LLC
1150 HERITAGE LA 600 HIGHWAY 169 S 0701
WAYZATA MN 55391 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55426
38 10-117-23 13 0005 38 10.117-23 14 0021
KURT E&A SUZANNE RETZLER I L JACOBS/A JACOBS REV TRST
1100 HERITAGE LA 990 HERITAGE LA
ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391
KURT E&A SUZANNE RETZLER IRWIN L JACOBS
1100 HERITAGE LA ALEXANDRA JACOBS
WAYZATA MN 55391 1700 SHORELINE DR
WAYZATA MN 55391
3R 10-117-23 13 0006 38 10-117-23 14 0022
S W KIRCHNER 1990 IRREVOC TR I L JACOBS/A JACOBS REV TRST
1090 HERITAGE LA 1700 SHORELINE DR
ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391
STEVEN W KIRCHNER IRWIN L JACOBS
1887962ND PLACE N ALEXANDRA JACOBS
MAPLE GROVE MN 55311 1700 SHORELINE DR
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 10-117-23 13 0007 38 10-117-23 14 0023
GOLDEN EMPIRE LLC 1 L JACOBS/A JACOBS REV TRST
1080 HERITAGE I.A 38 ADDRESS PENDING
ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 00000
GOLDEN EMPIRE LLC IRWIN L JACOBS
1330 JERSEY.AVE S ALEXANDRA JACOBS
MINNEAPOLIS MN 55426 1700 SHORELINE DR
WAYZATA MN 55391
38 10-117-23 13 0008 38 10-117-23 41 0002
S L BYRNES JR&P S BYRNES FOXHILI.ASSN
1025 HERITAGE LA 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 00000
PAMELA&STEPHEN L BYRNES JR BRUCE FLESSNER
1025 HERITAGE LA PO BOX 612
WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391
38 10-117-23 13 0009 38 10-117-23 42 0001
ELLEN M FRITZ TRUSTEE B W&M V FLESSNER
1035 HERITAGE LA 1190 HERITAGE LA
ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391
ELLEN M FRITZ BRUCE W&MELANIE V FLESSNER
1035 HERITAGE LA PO BOX 612
WAYZATAMN 55391 WAYZATAMN 55391
PC
Exhibit H
Hennepin Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map #17-3950
i Provided By: Resident and Real Estate Services Date: 6/2/2(,..
/r
10-117-23-12 �'`e--- 10-1 7-23-11
ti'
we
�a
4/// / fr.. ....i
10-117-23X13 ! 16 414444:..,,
ilia‘
ri( t
,
10-117-23-13 10-117t. . 44 _.
• --
a0e)
Her-tas e,pr- ®1 � �:- -
. �' _ ods - _
10-117-23-42 - 1/e-117 23-41
10-117-23-41
10-117-23-42
Buffer Size: 350 feet 0 120 240 480 ft
Map Comments: IIIIIIIII
1760 Shoreline Drive
Orono For more information contact:
MN 55391 Hennepin County GIS Office
300 6th Street South
Minneapolis,MN 55487
gis.info@hennepin.us
Date Application Received: 06/21/17
Date Application Considered as Complete:07/05/17 Wet4kEsH0-‘(-0
60-Day Review Period Expires: 09/03/17
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator
From: Melanie Curtis, Planner VY1GG
Date: 17 July 2017
Subject: #17-3951, Sven Gustafson o/b/o Forrest Burke, 1020 Tonkawa Road,
Variance
Public Hearing
Application Summary: The applicant requests an average lakeshore setback variance for a pool.
Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval.
Background
The new owner received variance approvals earlier this year to construct a new home and
elevated terrace partially within the average lakeshore setback.They now request an average
lakeshore setback variance to install a swimming pool within the elevated terrace.
LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Section 78-330-Setbacks:
LR-1B Required Proposed
Rear 50' +350'
North Side 10' 19'
South Side 10' 10'
Lakeshore 75' 166'
Average Lakeshore The pool within the elevated terrace encroaches as much as
46 feet into the average lakeshore setback.
Section 78-330-Lot Area/Width:
LR-1B Lot Area Lot Width
Required 43,560 s.f. (1.0 acres) 140
Actual 79,000 s.f. (1.8 acre) =100 @ 75' /=100' @ OHWL
Section 78-1403-Structural Coverage:
Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage
79,000 s.f. (1.8 acre) Allowed: 11,850 s.f. (15%)
Proposed: 5,153 s.f. (6.5%)
FILE#17-3951
17 July 2017
Page 2 of 4
Section 78-1700-Hardcover Calculations:
Stormwater Total Area in
Overlay District Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover
Zone
Tier
19,750 s.f. 15,358 s.f. 300 s.f.
Tier 1 79,000 s.f. w/in 75
(25%) (19.4%)
(existing)
Applicable Regulations:
Average Lakeshore Setback Variance (Section 78-1279)
The applicant is proposing to construct an in ground pool within the lakeside terrace on the
property. The pool will have a 46 foot encroachment lakeward of the average lakeshore setback
line within the approved terrace.
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
requested average lakeshore setback variance is in harmony with the Ordinance as the
most adjacent neighbor sits at a higher elevation and their lake views will not be
impacted by the pool.
2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.The variance resulting in a
permit for construction of a swimming pool in a residential zone 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 the
proposed pool lakeward of the average lakeshore setback appears to be
reasonable as the owners of the adjacent properties previously stated no
objection to the elevated terrace;the mature vegetation and topography
separate the subject property from the adjacent neighbors.
FILE#17-3951
17 July 2017
Page 3 of 4
b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner;
The neighboring home to the north is set back further from the lake than most
of the surrounding homes resulting in the severe average lakeshore setback
applied to the Property; and
c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. It does not
appear that the requested average lakeshore setback variance to permit the
pool within the elevated terrace will adversely impact views of the lake
currently enjoyed by the adjacent property owners.
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 swimming pool 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 extreme setback of the northerly
home is not in character with the immediate neighborhood.
9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which
the land is located.The majority of the homes both to the north and south of the
Property are closer in proximity to the lake and are more consistently in line with each
other.The home on the lot directly to the north is set back further than the other
immediately adjacent homes.
10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant.The applicant states that the variance is
necessary.
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 topography and location of
the adjacent home to the north 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.
FILE#17-3951
17 July 2017
Page 4 of 4
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 that there are demonstrable practical difficulties supporting the average lakeshore
setback variance request.
Public Comments
No new public comments were 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 of the variance.
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. Submitted Hardcover Calculations
Exhibit F. Applicant Example—Pools w/in Setback
Exhibit G. Property Owners List
Exhibit H. Plat Map
PC
Exhibit A
City of Orono #17-3951
Variance Application
Street Address: Application#
�OA T
O 2750 Kelley Parkway
V Orono,MN 55356
Main: 952-249-4600 Staff
fax: 952-249-4616 Fee $700
Mailing Address:
y /. P.O.Box 66 Date Received
Escrow $700 / $2,500
�t G Crystal Bay,MN 55323-0066 Notes
4A-ESHOQ`-
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: /o2-0 1-0#1koSwA V 7 Ortho, 17,4444 S53S4
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: accessory structure ahead of the principal structure on a lakeshore setback
(attach additional sheets as necessary)
APPLICANT INFORMATION: 0 check here if Applicant address should be used for billing
Applicant: Sven Gustafson
Phone (Primary): 612-294-6523
Mailing Address: 153 Lake Street City: Wayzata ZIP: 55391
Email: sven@stonewood.com
PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: 0 check here if Property Owner is same as applicant
JI1 check here if Property Owner address should be used for billing
Name: formes-t- 84.41-ke-
Phone(Primary): 451..-4/ 3- ?A-1cm
Mailing Address: 37O Lea Sh-cm-i City: Orono ZIP: SSIS 6
Email: -Ferre s-1_hurlaLt2 L t jam„corn
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 7000,1„.. OP
//// 1
Applicant Signature: 7 c72 1 � / 7
�L�:II/ Date:
Applicant Signature: ♦ Date:
Property Owner Signature: ,i/tl f Date: 2l g t/
Property Owner Signature: ,riii r� Date: c71/ 9/ 4-
Variance Application-January 2017
Page 4
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.
'./.. / gd—4,•/ ..,e:, t&W/6V
First M ••le Last
ago LQiLfie c(--
Address
600 a Avo ��354, f$?.2./Y 7 5,
City State Zip Phone
I underst. • mu•
, • is as stated above.
if
a /ti �ture 41r
Variance Application—January 2017
Page 14
PC
Exhibit B
PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM #17-3951
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."
Yes
2. "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner."
Yes
3. "The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality."
Yes
4. "Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use for the property exists
under the terms of the Zoning Chapter."
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."
Due to the long, thin shape and steepness of the lot it would be difficult to put a pool on the side of the house
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."
Variance Application—January 2017
Page 7
7. "The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family
dwelling."
8. "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately
adjoining property."
Due to the long, thin shape and steepness of the lot it would be difficult to put a pool on the side of the house
9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located."
10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right
of the applicant."
11. "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other
respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code."
12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to
alleviate demonstrable difficulty."
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):
There have been dozens of approvals such as this proposal, including several on Maxwell Bay. This proposal is
therefore in the context of the neighborhood. The comfort and safety of the homeowner was carefully
considered to minimize the distance the pool extends past the home.This is a reasonable proposal.
Variance Application—January 2017
Page 8
PC
Exhibit C
#17-3951
ARAGE
SE
r
N 677 34'k 711 4{t / Y Y \, '
�' T / y14 , A e yo:1,\ y X11
d e',0'' A.' L' + ew.,, _� ,., 6_PB-r t Imo, �1 "s1- "r - 6g' ' e •3� •AI1 IT%
oo
--A \N '',.4',....(','' ,`..;t' T H4*,'''. r.., ,4. ,.'"'''++lbeye,-.." 7ao. 1,,-s,,. .411.,, 1 1 - I, -r I e \ g( 1 O
« -� T ---y-1., `L• �� ..'.Teo- id \ s It'%1
�T + � _.,,E, F' �•
�,..�--' ✓r-mn d s. ,�✓+r..ae>a t`� �\
OM
Ak
si} . /C .0� •.. -act - — : ra -
�_- T '- a 1
a _:.,�_ .._.. r-" -;, - N67.24'tt 734.10,. ` - I 1
O +.'6
.. Ery irc:G I ti
NOloSE
k
g
HARDCOVER ,§
EXISTING
HOUSE
HOUSE-2810 SF d
GARAGE.,800 5F (TO REMAN) PROPOSED ELEVATIONS
DECK =765 SF GARAGE FLOOR=966.01 R
DRNE= 8185 SF(TO LOT UNE) MAN FLOOT=969.0
LAKE DECK=240 SF TLV OF FO.NDATKMJ=9663(VARES) Ve
RET WALLS WI 75 SB=70 SF(TO REMAIN) LOWEST FLOOR=956.43 91i,N
TOTAL=12670 SF/16.C% a a
PROPOSED
HOUSE= 3977 Sr
PORCH= 576 5F
TERRACE=1.350 SF Z
COLRTY0=2660 5,
I DRIVE = 5,675 SF SO
LAKEIXLX=240 SF LU
LAKE RET WALL=70 Y LEGAL DESCRIPTAM U
TOTAL 14]66 SF/I871 TRACT B.R.L.S.NO.617, W
fENNEPN COUNTY.AIN. W LLI p
EXISTING TO REMAN AND Q
PROPOSED=15366 Sr/195% ADDRESS-1020 TON(AWA ROADCC
0 30 BO 90 PEIN08-117-23-13-0014 J Q
(FUTURE pop,AND DEL7f= 1000 SF) (T)I:t O
SCALE IN FEET TOTAL EAISTI G.PROPOSED AAD FUTURE= 16366 SF/20.721 (.5 3
wsr MING SPOT ELEVATION LOTAREA
25S•-1997550 7 HCI ALLOWED
Z~
N(99&0}PROP0_0 SPOT ELEVATIN O C
jC)
SURVEY SUBJECT TO CHANGE PER mTHA
TITLE OR EASEMENT NFOtMATION m C3COH CANTILEVERED OVERHANG
TEPI SURFACE
GFE =GARAGE FLOELEVAT1ON VERIFY ALL MANSIONS AND
OR
i.
TFE .TOP OF FOVAATION ELEVAT1ON ELEVATORS WITH 110USE PLANS
LIE =LOWEST FLOOR ELEVATION
YEW,'ALL SETBACKS WITH CITYgli6 It�
gi 11
l
53yy iiz'p R �t- tai.
kq yi i i i..
PC
Exhibit D
#17-3951
S
153 EAST urE SWEET
`
D PcKi�uA
_ \ , i
I " /yJ11NESCAVAI —
LMt C3c-'i— STORAGE
_ I {API 5 ROOM
V.
�.3� — MAXWELL
UNEXCAVATED , t�r p—
MECHANICAL
• BEDROOMSMODERN
EXERTISE,,, \ T\
' 3,
ORONO,MN553
I
E .am •� BILLIARDS 1 r I.:
-, STORAGE f) „ed,
m
nnnn
BACKHLL O nw,m �r=O—I
LOWER II....IIII ill
unallo 'LAKE LEVEL
.,w. III MEpA IIIS TERRACE
C
LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN T
TYP.CEILING HEIGHT 9'•5" - } ■ ■ O POOL
APPROX.S.F.=2458 711.1-272 MECH.SSTOUGE+11 TERRACE 1,033 ! 1 r e R eee PROPOSED POOL
1H'=1%0"SCALE(2PXa8'PAPER) 7 ial 'b'i • Irn 1 '..
YUKEEMRY .. A.
STORAGE re' ,,,y�, ' _I MilI "'? i.1 � PRE-CONSTRUCTION
" fp, Ir- I REVIEW SET
:� 201LINE2017
.. � I
SHEET
Al
CLIENT
- -, 10 2 0
tl' ""--.......„,„Na ,,,,..w._. Tonkawa Road
Ak
— P
....a®. �Jilli� ■i Pool
�.......i,._._._._._._. - I �.
11 t Variance
_ m�MD Drawings
. ... .. ...yam=���.��_., �� .r� ...e....-. --'-•-
miiiiliiiipsti��� ��_���= �����i = 20 June 2017
eftu0 Ira NM K=0 7.4fej pip
y"
- .d. - ..,..w.... -
EAST ELEVATION
1/1'=1.4)*SCALE(24 4r RAPER)
"..7.•,------!--'------„"."."
.. •, ..... lam
—7= 41111=111
fiLkiiiiiiiiii
11111111111111•111111
OE .1111= �;:
w
Ip
!•� FOOD
.��, TanF. CSE
-=-..-EE .. .m,........... IMMNIIIIINNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEINIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIM
esKucHe
NORTH ELEVATION DESIGN
n.
•
GRAPHIC E,; I, ,•
GRAn
1,10 I,
Pri9.1511EOMETAL _
.14 1 020
mimeo comes
TYPICAL
....
Tonkawa Road
Haw.swr. 1
COLO.M40 oo.SAL !,.
„ ------.TCIMr..7;,11£ imiwill111111.1111111M01111111,,, . „ ' c
xliC.0.011rF Y.
•
rekio
...,,-..11iNi .VOMMIMMINNI !..!
M= .
r.44•1•1111•111111111
cuo coemet Atli. ..,... `4'..
=1111111111111•1•1/ Pool
--.:.;",-, MM.^
a., BY W11100w/.4.
MIN
1•11111111101ina ti.
Variance
j.7....—.. ..
Drawings
------- -4101010111.1lailliiiiiiiiiiiiiiillaii10101•101sirr mon ilw. .. .....-, „,,,,,0„,,,
...------------ —v.-.
.... Emmommimmmomm•ammor+ .......w
...11•1111MIMIIIMMIMINIMI11111101111111=1•111•1•111111111111MOMIIMINIMMIMINNINW nommemomm I•1•••••=C !,
:111•11111=IMMIMIMIIIIII=MMMI=1=1111111111N MEW =II
,mmumemommommeimmonnuminninnommomemamm,
A„,„,„,
„ ,,,„,„ .....-,....--4 ......••• mal.
* INIIIIMMIIIMEIELREEILVAIM11511111L COM. MI NM >
- "11111 =1= ffir. ===
-.....MBIlmoo nimm..P.,..101=IMIIIMIIMBEININMIIIMI•f!,.. 3=1• 20 June 2017
1.1111111111•0111 IIIMIII
1.111=MMIMWE' II
"MII1111•11111MONNIMMINVIIIMMO. MINIM/
-.---..........-.-.-------.---.-.“. ........ .... ............“.......... T • ...,..L.,,,,,,,,,,,
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
..:
WEST-ELEVATION
GRAPHIC SCALE
• •
.........m.
EZEZI
...„
td.
....••••••••mm= m.........-----la, ii3E3
__.,..
— IR,
— --
- ,.............,i
-=-. __. '
iriiiimm
i
HE, lara========m==maiit. RA 111116E1 ..--
----------------
—
---- -------------------.,. ..,
•!-l----........ .., Eu...Hr..... "ILIT ME Eat I ,...... ,,,,q00„ ee
_.........._ ,-....
....., :-..._-1
....,
mr-a, iv
.....-wi :Div .._.• i,. Elm , 1
,._. ........ ===
1 grail Z1"n anion.--- i.--
pliiiIMINMISi Sift....ataaithraa a
.,
..., 1=----1
....•••••••NM.=NM.=MN=MOM NM IIIMMEIM 4.• •IC=LI==ES=======I==,====.1=TIMMr =3.2= -.
- .......110ERWOMMEN.I.M.0101.MMOMM 1011.111 .11111M.MIMMM MIME 12. 6.....U.....2.1.137.1.36.113.,....1733.7i
j
,
''."'""....I.MIMMIIMTIEIMIMITaEinin ill II .. '"'" e"i—iii mil
------- = m.-:
iriciima MN Mil
es K UCH e
_______
______ ,
.. .., ., ___.
DESIGN
•
•
PC
Exhibit E
City of Orono #17-3951
if514 Hardcover Calculation Worksheet
-se
Property Address: 1020 TONKAWA ROAD
Kf5HPrepared by: Date:
Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Iti121 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 Total
Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width
Survey (Square Feet)
(Example) (Garage) (24'x 30') (720 S.F.)
A HOUSE/GARAGE 4,279 S.F.
B PORCH 576 S.F.
C TERRACE(MAIN AND LOWER,INCLUDING POOL) 2,662 S.F.
D COURTYARD 2,880 S.F.
E DRIVE 6,300 S.F.
F EXISTING DRIVE TO REMAIN 1,635 S.F.
G GARAGE TO REMAIN 656 S.F.
H LAKESIDE PATIO TO REMAIN 300 S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
K S.F.
L S.F.
M S.F.
N S.F.
O S.F.
P S.F.
(� S.F.
R S.F.
g S.F.
T S.F.
U S.F.
✓ S.F.
W S.F.
x S.F.
Y S.F.
Z S.F.
(1) Total Proposed Hardcover 19,288 S.F.
Excludable Hardcover(See City Code Sec 78-1684):
EXISTING DRIVE TO REMAIN 1,635 S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
(2) Total Excludable Hardcover ,1,635 S.F.
(3) Net Proposed Hardcover [Subtract line(2)from line(1)] 117,635 S.F.
(4) Total Lot Area 79,000 S.F.
Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3)+(4)] 122.3 %
Variance Application—January 2017
Page 12
PC
Exhibit F
TC #17-3951
t
•* -, .., _
a* tr.__ ..„._
~„ z�
w
. Variance
" *46. )IP. a .. Drawings
,,,O. . ,.. .. ,,, „ .,4 4 .
44:-
� as
N. - l.'.. �� `'t 20 June 201
4
i ` ...1..',4r, ,-,
... _ ot
„.a, `i4., . .. , .. „„,,, . ..., .
a
:4,..:,,,,,,_ x
Tey M /Po ��+y.,� \
11
J t
` 1111 x t W1c41,75). E
a
,,,,. .,„*.
Maxwell Bay ~°a '
a ti
= POOLS IN
SETBACK es KUCHe
DESIGN
•
. t a 'e ' f ■ 020
'� * Tonkawa Road
sir ; • to
• .,• t Pool
r 4"' _
a� � l Variance
'1.0\
Drawings
V.-.\" 20 June 2017
r. t xe ChF1Td_ . ' _ N.
, N
-1, ".- ,•,,, • • -. 1` r............ .„,, ., ,,..,..... .
,,. ,.. , ,„.. , . ,.. „„,,... „ ._
.. , •Ii 4 tift,\ -'4.:,,,'"k '''''';
�i '\ 5 t
e' ( 4 µ i`'''k.--;.--''
o t<••
h n
`*00R
Maxwell Bay , ,.,• :
,: = POOLS IN
{ SETBACK e s K u c n e
D E S i r N
1020
Tonkawa Road
SY. ,.�.. • h4. v
• e sem. ' t
•. pp
Pool
- variance
i
,;► 44. 1°' Drawings
i
s Y� y i fids
^�' f d',.... .' Y j ,O 1 t .t 20 June 2017
1 *kr }
pf
400100 ..,
• F
.
r
'-L4)s\ E
... i
W Y
y \\ clp-
pow
l .r
,.., .,:, i
r
•
p T;�
0
7,,
4,-,,,',I..,.
Fr
Maxwell Bay ;_,1 -�: (-7. S '-''
t --:�4�`
�_ j
= POOLS IN
SETBACK es KUCHe
DESIGN
■ 020
S Tonkawa Road
Ilk
� ,4ii h
Pool
Variance
Drawings
`j "�"' Maxwell Bay20 June 2017
.' ' . ,
t l'
;14
' t, iL.` + N
L.14:()N\
I w' E
e*' r E.. , '#.. SEH'()()/)
qt
...
�LLy `�" Mr •v. � /_' ..d i , I �
`
�
%x• . _ ,.4
' ..,y}tW a '1� R _• r . :•, , = POOLS IN
.i , . 4 , .,._:I" e SETBACK e s K uc H e
DESIGN
A , t-. .- e 1020
iir
Tonkawa Road
4,40,
i a.W" v
. POOI
Variance
pkDrawings
r. 20 June 2017
Maxwell Bay
ir
y, ,, N
10
+ '$ "�0 E
• (,a ;, ,.
y'ri f i ) s
�9 rA
., .........1140 . '' ='—` —4-"N„,
' .*1? ' ,kei '' ' „. --,`‘ riA*4 • 4* ' It ' , - S ,-;
•
they y *"*.•'' y, „a = POOLS IN
.+ ,(. SETBACK es KUCHe
DESIGN
PC
RUN DATE:03/07/2017 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) Exhibit G
38 08.117-21 120001 38 08-11'-23130020 #17-3951
CRAIG F SMITH R T WALLANDER.1 C WALLANDER
980 TONKAWA RD 10'0 TONKAWA RD
ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356
CRAIG F SMITH RAPHAEL T WALLANDER
PO BOX 66 LAURA C WALLANDER
NAVARRE MN 55392 1070 TONKAWA ROAD
ORONO MN 55356
38 08-117-23 12 0002 38 08.117-23 21 0015
G B BAKER&LAG BAKER DI LUNDQUIST TRUST
970 TONKAW A RD 975 1'ONKA11 A RD
ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356
GARY A BAKER DJ LUNDQUIST TRUST
LEIGH.ANNE G BAKER 6277 NORTH OCEAN BLVD
9'0 TONKAWA RD OCEAN RIDGE FL 33435
LONG LAKE MN 55356
38 08-117.23 12 0003 38 08.117-23 21 001.6
STEVEN B LIFFSCHULTZ ET AL GABRIEL E J.\BBOUR
960 TONKAWA RD 985 TONKAWA RD
ORONO AIN 55356 ORONO MN 55356
STEVEN&DEANN LIEFSCHULTZ GABRIEL E JABBOUR
960 TONKAWA RD 220 TONKA BAY ROAD
LONG LAKE MN 55356 TONKA BAY MN 55331
38 08.117-23 12 0005 38 08-117-23 24 0002
R J HOFFMAN ETAL MARK D PARTEN'JULIE A PARTEN
1000 TONKAWA RD 1015 TONKAWA RD
ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356
RAYMONDJ HOFFMAN MARK D&JULIE A PARTEN
1000 TONKAWA RD 1015 TONKAWA RD
LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356
38 08.1 17-23 13 0001 38 08.117.23 24 0003
JAMES P BEBO H R NEESON&A L MESSINA
1065 TONKAWA RD 1025 TONKAN A RD
ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356
JAMES P BEBO HUGH NEESON&ANDREA MESSINA
10285 89TH AVE N 1025 TONEAWA RD
MAPLE GROVE MN55369 LONG LAKE MN 55356
38 08-117-23 13 0002 38 08-117-23 24 0004
CHRISTIAN S.\NFT&SARENA LIN SHARI L BALLARD&RI BARNETT
1075 TONKAWA RD 1035 TONKAV.A RD
ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN,55356
CHRISTIAN SANFT&SARENA LIN SHARI L BALLARD
1075 TONK.AN A RD MARIANNE BARNETT
LONG LAKE MN 55356 1035 TONKAWA RD
LONG LAKE MN 55356
38 08-117-23 13 0013 38 08-117-23 24 0005
PAMELA NAGORSKE TRUSTEE DANIEL&RUTH PARTEN
1040 TONKAW\RD 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 00000
PAMELA NAGORSKF TRUSTEE DANIEL&RUTH PARTEN
PAMELA A NAGORSKE REVOC TRST 1015 TONKAWA RD
1040 TONKAWA RD ORONO MN 55356
LONG LAKE MN 55356
38 08-117-23 130014
DCH;GLASJ WILLIAMS
1020 TONE AWA RD
ORONO MN 55356
DOUGLAS J WILLIAMS
1020 TONKAWA RD
LONG LAKE MN 55356
38 08-117-23 13 0015
D C BREMER&C A BREMER
1030 TONKAWA RD
ORONO MN 55356
DENNIS C BREMER
C1'NTHIAA BREMER
1030 TONKAW A RD
ORONO MN 55356
38 08-11'-23 130019
DIELAN LLC
1060 TONE AWA RD
ORONO MN 55356
DIELAN LLC
1060 TONKAN A RD
LONG 1 AKE.AIN 55356
PC
Exhibit H
r Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map #17-3951
4 Provided By Resident and Real Estate Services Date 2/7/20'7
J
Gi
U
C
a.!
08-117-23-21 08 117-23-12
Allelill „01401111
l°'
IIV
,, , ' wiiiii/jr.,,
4'
08-117-23-13 _.- — i
08-117-23-24
;,,i4,,,,,_
F
i
08-117-23-31 08-117-23-42
Buffer Size: 350 feet o X20 240 480 ft
I t t t l I t t l
Map Comments:
0811723130014
DOUGLAS J WILLIAMS For more informationGIS contact
ce
1020 Tonkawa Road Hennepin County ffi
Orono,MN 55356 300 6th Street South
Minneapolis,MN 55487
gis.mfo@hennepin.us
Date Application Received: 07/05/17 �O�VO
Date Application Considered as Complete:NA
60-Day Review Period Expires: N/A
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members yFt ��
Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator i'FFSHO��
From: Melanie Curtis, Planner h'1GG
Date: 17 July 2017
Subject: #17-3945, Paul Vogstrom o/b/o William &Sue Dunkley,
2710 Pence Ln & 2709 Walters Port Ln
Sketch Plan
Application Summary: The applicant is requesting comments via the sketch plan process for a
proposed preliminary plat to rearrange the property line between the two properties and create
outlots and a new private road serving 3 homes.
Staff Recommendation: The Planning Commission is asked to provide comment and direction on
the issues outlined within the staff report.
Background
The properties are zoned LR-1B One Family Lakeshore Residential with a maximum density of 1 unit per
acre. 2710 Pence Lane has 3.8 acres in area (4.01 total acres and an approximate 0.21 acre wetland);
while 2709 Walters Port has 0.56 acre in area.Together, the properties total 4.3 dry acres;the
proposed density of 0.4 units per acre is conforming and below the maximum density within the
comprehensive plan.
Currently there are three homes addressed off of Pence Lane, all served by a±12 foot wide driveway
(see Exhibit H).The driveway extends from the 2710 Pence property to Kelly Avenue within a 30 foot
wide platted private road right-of-way approximately 160 feet in length.The first home (2701 Pence)
has two curb cuts onto this driveway.The driveway extends through a gate just south of 2701 Pence.
After the gate,the driveway is extended,serving 2 homes: the Huelers at 2715 Pence and the Dunkleys
at 2710 Pence. The Dunkleys also own the property at 2709 Walters Port Lane.
The applicant initially submitted for a preliminary plat.Their plan reflected a number of issues
necessitating planning commission and Council direction so they requested the application be reviewed
as a sketch plan.They hope to take the sketch plan feedback to finalize their preliminary plat plans for
review and approval in August or September.
Currently staff has the survey dated 06/28/17 by Cardarelle (Exhibit B) and the site plan labeled
"proposed survey"dated 06/30/17 for reference (Exhibit C).These two plans are not completely
coordinated. For the purpose of this review staff will use the Cardarelle Survey for lot area, hardcover,
and layout references.The applicant will need to clarify and provide plans which coordinate for the
preliminary plat submittal.
FILE#17-3945
17 July 2017
Page 2 of 5
Summary of the Request--Sketch Plan
The Dunkleys wish to change the lot line between their Walters Port home property and 2710 Pence so
that they can increase the size and lakeshore frontage of the Walters Port property,and add an access
via the Pence Lane driveway.According to City Code Section 18-136, up to two homes may be served
via a private driveway.The addition of a third home (the Dunkleys'Walters Port home)triggers the
need to create a private road within a platted outlot for access.The need to create the private road
outlot combined with the applicants' requested variances,and lot line adjustment requires approval of
a preliminary plat.
According to the Section 82-281,a private road outlot must have a platted width of 50 feet and a
minimum paved width of 24 feet with a 100 foot diameter cul-de-sac(80 foot paved diameter).
Conformity with LR-1B Zoning District Lot Requirements*as recently amended
Side Yard
Side Yar
Lot Lot Front Adjacent Rear Adjacent
Area Width Yard I to Another Yard to Street
(acre) (feet) (feet) Lot (feet) (feet)
(feet)
1 I 140 35 ( 10 20 20
Proposed Lot 1 (2709 Walters Port Ln):
The existing lot area is 24,530 square feet or 0.56 acres;the property has 252 feet in width at the lake
and±140 feet at the 75 foot setback.The buildable area of this property is nearly nonexistent due to its
shape,size, and lake and average lakeshore setback requirements.The existing home is entirely within
the 75 foot setback.
The applicant proposes to adjust the eastern lot line to the east.According to the survey,the proposed
lot area will increase to 60,500 square feet or 1.3 acres and the width will increase to just over 400 feet
at the lake and approximately 230 feet at the 75 foot setback where 1.0 acre and 140 feet is required.
The buildable area is improved greatly, however the addition shown on the proposed plan will still
need an average lakeshore setback variance,and the connecting portion of the new addition to the
existing house will be within 75 feet of the lake. Proposed hardcover calculations show the hardcover
level with the lot line adjustment and the new improvements will be 43.7%(existing+proposed =
26,455 square feet), requiring a variance.Structural coverage will be 9,950 square feet or 16%for the
new lot and with additions.
Proposed Lot 2 (2710 Pence Ln):
This existing lot has 3.8 dry acres in area,and 280 feet in width at the lake and 245 feet at the 75 foot
setback.The existing home on this property encroaches into the average lakeshore setback based on
the Dunkleys' Walters Port home and the Huelers' home.
According to the survey,the proposed lot area will be±one acre.The survey reflects lot areas of both
44,400 square feet and 40,400 square feet.This should be clarified as the lot should meet the one acre
requirement (43,560 square feet).The width will be 136 feet at the lake and 157 feet at the 75 foot
setback where 140 feet is required, requiring a variance. Additionally,the applicant is proposing a new
home and pool to be constructed on this lot with a significant average lakeshore setback variance
FILE#17-3945
17 July 2017
Page 3 of 5
needed. Proposed hardcover for this lot is shown at 22% (9815 square feet);structural coverage is
shown to be 10%.
Outlots:
There are four outlots proposed.The plans differ as to their labeling.This review references the outlot
labels as shown on the Cardarelle survey. The existing driveway is shown as Outlot C and will be
widened to 25 feet once past the gates; Outlot C is 0.34 acres. Outlot B is 0.2 acre in area and is shown
as a possible add-on to the Huelers' property. Outlot D is 0.5 acre in area. Outlot E contains the
wetland and is approximately 1.1 acres in area. There is no Outlot A.
Issues for Discussion:
1. The applicant is proposing to utilize the existing driveway,although widening the paved width
of the roadway to 25 feet.The Code requires creation of a 50 foot outlot beginning at Kelly
Avenue and continuing to a 100 foot cul-de-sac. They show a 25 foot wide outlot for the
private road where a 50 foot wide outlot is required.There is a circular turnaround shown on
the Cardarelle Survey which may or may not be a private improvement on one or both of the
lots 2709 Walters Port and 2710 Pence.The applicant should clarify the plan. Fire Marshal
James Van Eyll has reviewed this plan and felt that generally the plan would meet their access
needs. Planning Commission should direct the applicant regarding the proposed private road
outlot width and the circular driveway turnaround.
2. The private road is shown to connect with Walters Port in addition to the new shared driveway
curb cut for 2709 Walters Port and 2710 Pence Ln.The applicant should clarify the connection
to Walters Port. Is it to be a through street connection?Or an emergency access which will be
gated most of the time? Planning Commission should ask for clarification regarding the
Walters Port connection.
3. The plan suggests the connection of the Pence Lane Drive to Walter Port Lane. While Staff is
generally supportive of additional transportation connections,this does introduce additional
impacted properties. Further,the question arises, should Walters Port be improved to city
code standards due to the number of connections it provides? (see Code Section 82-281
Exhibit D)According to the Code,the private road outlot should be widened to 50 feet and the
paved width increased to 28 feet, or 24 feet at a minimum.The applicant will need to provide
the standard private road easements and evidence of a maintenance agreement for both
portions of the private road. Planning Commission should direct the applicant regarding the
creation of the proposed private through road.
4. The applicant is proposing to keep the existing entrance monuments and gate.The monuments
are separated by 20 feet. Entrance gates on private driveways are permitted, however a gate
spanning a public or private road is uncommon. According to Code Section 78-1405, entrance
monuments serving three or more residences must be separated by a minimum horizontal
width of 22 feet; a gate serving three or more residences must have a minimum horizontal
opening of 20 feet in the full open position.A photo of the existing gates are attached within
Exhibit E.The planning commission should discuss the request for a gate crossing the private
roadway and the proposed width of the horizontal separation.
5. According to the survey, proposed Outlot B is shown as a separate outlot to provide the option
•
FILE#17-3945
17 July 2017
Page 4 of 5
for the Huelers (2715 Pence)to purchase additional land. It appears the proposed
configuration would still require an easement over 2710 Pence for access to the private road.
However,the 06/30/17 site plan shows a potential to connect the Hueler outlot to the private
road.This connecting outlot is staff's preference. Planning Commission should give direction
regarding this outlot.
6. The existing connection from the Dunkleys' 2709 Walters Port driveway will be removed. A
small portion of this driveway will remain in order to provide for a back up hammerhead for
2707 Walters Port. Staff would recommend the Dunkleys'Walters Port property be
readdressed off of Pence Lane.
7. Variances. Planning Commission should understand the variances necessary to accommodate
the proposal.
a. As proposed Lot 2 (2710 Pence Ln)would require the following variances to
accommodate the plans as proposed:
i. A lot width variance as the proposed lot does not meet the 140 foot width
requirement at the OHWL;
ii. Possibly a lot area variance from the 1.0 acre requirement.
iii. An average lakeshore setback variance for the new home and pool.
b. As proposed Lot 1 (2709 Walters Port)would require the following variances:
i. A hardcover variance to accommodate the proposed addition;
ii. A 75-foot lake setback variance for the portion of the addition connecting the
proposed addition to the existing home;
iii. An average lakeshore setback variance for the additions (based on the house
location at 2710 Pence and 2707 Walters Port.
Sketch Plan Review Parameters
The goal of this review is to provide the applicant with an overview of the pertinent City ordinances and
how they affect the proposed plat, and to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal. The
above "Issues for Discussion" reveals a number of issues with the proposed plat and should provide
direction to the applicant regarding the plat. Planning Commission should review each topic and
identify any issues to which the developer should pay special attention.
As a sketch plan review, any comments or suggestions to the applicant are non-binding but should be
extremely helpful as the applicant moves forward. At the discretion of the applicant,this sketch plan
will also be forwarded to the City Council for review.
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A. Application
Exhibit B. Proposed Plan—Cardarelle Survey 06/28/17
Exhibit C. Proposed Site Plan 06/30/17
Exhibit D. City Code Sections
Exhibit E. Site Photos
Exhibit F. Submitted House Plans for Lot 1
Exhibit G. Aerial Photos
Exhibit H. Pence Lane Existing Layout
Exhibit I. Neighbor Comment
FILE#17-3945
17 July 2017
Page 5 of 5
City of ro n o 1 - 9149
Con Application PC
Exhibit A
Street Address: Application# #17-3945
2750 Kelley Parkway Date
Q Orono, MN 55356 Ag°piv D Received 7.'s'/
_a Staff /ji C.--
Main: 952-249-4600 JUL 0 5 2017 Fee: $350 00
,a`� fax: 952-249-4616 Notes.
• �� Mailing Address:
' CITY OF ORONO
tf �, P.O. Box 66
k sHO' Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066
Applicable regulation Section 78-47. Concept plans may be accepted for proposed amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan,the Zoning Ordinance, or the Zoning Map.
Submittal Checklist:
i IM ::::.•,ti. 1¢rr.7,7711lr...i°I ...-'.:'4 f..` y
42 Application fee
9wintOit.`
❑ 4 Build Plans
El 6 Additional information ou feel hel•s describe the • •'ect
❑ 8 JAdditional information =•uested b C' Staff
PROPERTY INFORMATION:
Site Address:
PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION; '
Name: '`.5i t l , ti►,A1 D gy ) t-t A W AWA/
Phone(primary): Z7 O q r S!T" (312-ONTO
Mailing Address: c —
City, State&ZIP
Email:
PROPERTY OWNER:
• Agrees to pay additional fees(staff time not covered in the original fee payment)and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of
this extension application,and
• Certifies that the information supplied is true and coned to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant and 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
• Applicant acknowledges they must be present at all scheduled review meetings. If an applicant and/or 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 vioArnall.
Property Owner Signature: c Date: EC
R. WED
Property Owner Signature: K' Date:
JUL 052017
Concept Application—January 2017
3 45 .945 CITY OF ORONO
•
II)
LL 1 I I I \ I \
ti I ,
I y
W TF V
I i \\`n ',E" N 6977'55"E 175.54
I
illi - OUOT D
1 I i• :y-yTL
23225 SF/0.5 AC
if I
0 30 60 90 II 1 W „,,f.'” - , \ ;
IffloffigardA
SCALE IN FEET ,
q•'=EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION. „
%(99�OpROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION o` Io„'
=DIRECTION SURFACE DRANAGE 0
COH =CANTUEVEREO OVERHANG g \ M
OHI. =OVERHEAD UT8-Y LIRE
GFE =GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION -'1')
TFE =TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION f. Y+ ���
LFE =LOWEST FLOOR ELEVATION p�`, e.,' 0' �e "ayr-
I \ OUFLOT€
—
1 r 4$bo0 SF/1.1AC _-;
DUN LEY �
2709 WALTERS PORT LANE 27110RPAN
PID 21-117-23-23-0045 2710 PENCE LANE 4 'i d.,
PID 21-117-23-23-0051 I ,.
LOT 4,BLOCK 3 WALTERS PORT LOT 1,BLOCK 1,CARMEN BAY HEIGHTS I ZI
AREA =24530 SF 0.56 AC AREA= 175000 SF/4.01 AC Q - r rT
HARDCOVER HARDCOVER •”
EKISTNG E/STNG .v 25
HOUSE=3810 SF HOUSE=6000 SF
DRIVE= 2990 SF DRIVE= 8070 SF
DECK=280 SF PATIOS= 1500 SF
PATIOS =
830 SF WALKSTPS 430 SF dI
HOTTUB TOTAL=240 SF TOTAL=24830 SF/14.2R
WALKSTPS=480 SF
RWALLS N 7558=275 SF ! �5• y .n
TOTAL=8885 5F/36.3% a\ L"L"lp \ •4
PROPOSED LOT I AREA-60500 51/1.4 AC Cl �'Ss.
PROPOSED LOT 2 AREA=40400 SF/1.0 AC - :�ry �\ �\ \
PROPOSED PROPOSED - y \'
A004TKW=6140 SF /OUSE-4440 Sr 4 (/ - .'F,,`-'` \' \ N
04715E= 11401 SF ORM-=4250 SF \
TOTAL = 17570 SF/29.0X WALK =125 SF 3 + I' p� ,\ Y
TOTAL EASING TO REMAIN TOTAL=19875 Sr/22.1X I A"
Aro PROPOSED=23465 SF/.Tear I 11 v11.L-I I I 4
LOT I,OUALOTS D AAD E �' .p8I 'yY t , i -'_$ \
TOTAL AREA=131725.S<"/SO AC 1 r
23465 5F=779f � rd1 s`6 .
OF TOTAL AREA LOT 1.OUTLOTS 0 AAO E 1 T •'O L /I �/
,
IP
f �> is
a G'.•
�`
4#EAST I 1 � O'C�'
5,M,M 16.0 _I,,,,, I - J d i 1
� ks - ,"$ - h £
HUUSt — - - ta4✓Tt „yt
r
a wt ... ._ JF "N -
as �ASR\e4,,,rtn+
m
T L
1
�r l . LOT 2'
1 'u n1 t ' ' •4400 SF/10AC I l
..-iv*---
Ca I
1 1"� \ LOT 1 e• , �x it \ A., '`� 1If2
6056,. SF/14 p0 aa.o II y` Tyy„
1.
c'"` '� PR�o�'pp ,1 �;�° / 8I4002SF/0.1tA6:� i sig4
ADDI
a a.T°-1-•EVA'. //,,�✓ 7 -_ I Yom _
s\ ) \y •� 0^" .'' ak � � N 8977'W 11610 I I6iR
Ilk
s m'
/ a
\ ,,\ ,,,, , .. ., ..0*
.\ 'ba Vr'a" / 0 0
5
'9� , 1117 �,:1r' ` ` r »"�W"° I,. i---J -Z� ,, v w O
�" 1t11 ��'
EXISTING } Jo On-Q-:I
\ ....... HOUSE a Q Z O Q
yZ r\\\ u� �? W
I
Z �' '.,`� ,4'y� a a le-
oH'
hg� s 1f
..
J
I Lr)
m `
U
M
1 \.
r \
X I I \; \
W i 9 °E N 8927'55 E 75.51
N :fie
I �4'' sp
I
Ny+''
41
44
0 30 60 90 I1 1\ �„ \ 3
SCALE IN FEET \ s. L, ry 1.,. r''" %�
Ep°=EXISTING SPOT ELEVATX)N. ` "z e' h
X(999.OPROPOSED SPOT ELEVATOR ''('/' N
DIRECTION SURFACE DRAINAGE : o
CON =CANTILEVERED OVERHANG 0
Oft =OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE 2 .tl pn
GFE =GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION
TFE =TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION ' e"' -4.�aQ:
LFE =LOWEST FLOOR ELEVATION d'^
LOT 1. LOCK ANE CARMEN BAY IEIGHTS . as \
_ i.
2709 WALTZ L
PD 21-717-23-23-0045 1LY
LOT 4.BLOCK 3 WALTERS PORT �21-117-23-23-0051 Vr.'
AREA =24530 SF 0.56 AC AREA 175000 SF/4.01 AC •Q �
1R7
...n. r'
HARDCOVER HARDCOVER
EXISTING DOSING ..p
HOUSE=3810 SF HOUSE-6000 SF
DRIVE= 2990 SF ORNE= 6070 SF
DECK=280 SF PATIOS= 1500 SF=430
TOTAL
PATIOS=830 SF PS 430 SF LE1 ,�.
HOTTUB=240 SF TOTAL=24830 SF/14.2%
WALKSTPS=480 SF _
RWALL5 N 75S8-275 SF / � :5•
TOTAL=8885 SF/36.3%
` /A° `�1-``\\Y 11 -0 '4 \
, I,,T I •'IT Ii _ p
4+"� a9_I F -
I � T
1 0 ,1°,> y,+° i / /
/ �
F EAST .` `-...�
S
IPI.16.0 .J' iT I >fi ('1.-;•',..•
� .��'
I.V -N6�. �,.. td 6p,.d ,
y
AA _ c' N8.7°�3' .r - r 6 1
twsc / s^ en' �4'
C d * 4d , Jt.
\\ M
6 4, f. e ..c; .✓ R c dl 11 X
sa \\\ .40 ' I fig„
/ t" Edi.'
`r0 ' / p N 8927'W 14630 1
I 1 i rI*11215'1
�r / o / ,-,
1'` o y 2
2, R,, of q L` g' I
Qvd. ►. '
vI v IC , e, \
W
\\ �" ''' �_ ililik m U
r\\. �\b 4A h W
1 1 �r I Q
' -r"
VIII\ ,� \fir'.°. �` `r '� �� EXISTING
i 2k C Q
o EtT
'
OARV
:T•3
., - i 6 /74 F
Li-0£-9
N
3NV1 33N3d /1bOd Sa31-1VM
U U) _ :MINOISHQ
O/� _0 M
x N`
W l3 OS OZZ'64
101 9NI1SIX3 21313OH
'411twariA ...,_
,, t
.,�
ri�
V,V43135 Al.
/n J_ o. 'b4
�� 101 - Id OS 00B'49
1.101
4,
rd QMdI '/P - \ rill
,, ��w;'� 1,'
• NOIldO , a • j`'�4.
T
a 1071 nO -7,-,,`. ._ - �.
asnori
1 9NI151X3
1.1..1
Ah .. nn
.aaAlaa9 Nil5ixR
416 #1-
yI;
-7IP iJ es OBV9I.
/-.... v10'iln0. --I N
—vem - Q
0 f n ' Ia..1
saiaN a CL
61,ATi r.i,, .3r.Z
')loilno
O
!L
I
ld OS SZ'CEZ
910'11(10 —
M LT-o£-9
, 2NV 1 RON3d /1>=1Od S1:1211VM
lig NDISTQ
mak
Atc
411
r
I
t '
A
N /
sr
PC
Exhibit D
#17-3945
Sec. 78-330. -Area, height, lot width and yard requirements.
(a) Height. No structure or building in the LR-1 B district shall exceed 30 feet in height except as provided
in section 78-1366.
(b) Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be observed:
Side Yard
Side Yard
Lot Lot Front Adjacent Rear
Area Width Yard to Another Yard Adjacent
(acre) (feet) (feet) Lot (feet) to Street
(feet) (feet)
1 140 35 10 20 30
(c) Within the LR-1 B zoning district,the side yard setback for lots that are non-conforming as to their width
shall be the lessor of ten feet or equal to ten percent of the lot width as defined. However, in no case
shall the side yard setback be less than 7.5 feet.
(Code 1984, § 10.24(5); Ord. No. 18 3rd series, § 3, 9-27-2004; Ord. No. 173 3rd series, § 5, 6-
27-2016; Ord. No. 199 3rd series, § 3, 6-12-2017)
DIVISION 3. -SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT STANDARDS
Sec. 78-1276. -Generally.
The Shoreland Overlay District standards are in addition to the requirements set forth in this chapter
for the various zoning districts. In case of conflict, the most restrictive provision applies.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)), 2-24-1992)
Sec. 78-1277. - Minimum lot area/lot width standards.
Minimum lot area and lot width standards of the underlying zoning district shall apply,with the following
exceptions:
(1) No lot within 1,000 feet of a general development lake and approved for duplex use per sections
78-228(10), 78-253(10), 78-303(10), 78-328(9), 78-348(10), or 78-367(10)shall be less than 135
feet in width nor less than 26,000 square feet in area, if riparian, nor less than 17,500 square feet
in area, if nonriparian, but such lot shall also meet the minimum lot area and width requirements
of the respective underlying zoning district.
(2) No lot within 300 feet of a tributary and approved for duplex use per sections 78-228(10), 78-
253(10), 78-303(10), 78-328(9), 78-348(10), or 78-367(10) shall be less than 150 feet in width
Page 1
when no sewer is available, nor less than 115 feet in width when sewer is available, but such lot
shall also meet the minimum lot width requirements of the respective underlying zoning district.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(A)), 2-24-1992; Ord. No. 63 3rd series, § 1, 9-14-209)
Sec. 78-1278. -Lakeshore access lots.
Lots intended as accesses to public waters or as recreation areas for use by owners of nonriparian
lots within subdivisions are permissible and must meet the following minimum standards:
(1) Any such lakeshore access lot shall be designated as an outlot and shall not be considered as a
buildable residential lot.
(2) Such an outlot shall not be subject to minimum lot area or width standards,except that the number
of inland nonriparian lots which may gain access via such outlot shall not exceed the number
obtained by dividing the outlot width measured at the shoreline by the required zoning district lot
width, rounded down to the nearest whole number.
(3) Such outlot shall be jointly owned by all owners of nonriparian lots in the subdivision who are
provided riparian access rights on the access outlot.
(4) No such access outlot shall be created as part of a subdivision plat except when the building lots
within the subdivision are separated by an existing public or private roadway from the lakeshore,
and the land on either side of the roadway was in common ownership as of the effective date of
Ordinance No. 101, adopted February 24, 1992.
(5) Covenants or other equally effective legal instruments must be developed that specify which lot
owners have authority to use the access lot and what activities are allowed. The activities may
include watercraft launching, loading, storage, beaching, mooring or docking. They can also
include other outdoor recreational activities that do not significantly conflict with general public
use of the public water or the enjoyment of normal property rights by adjacent property owners.
Examples of the nonsignificant conflict activities include swimming, sunbathing or picnicking.The
covenants must limit the total number of vehicles allowed to be parked and the total number of
watercraft allowed to be continuously moored, docked or stored over water, and must require
centralization of all common facilities and activities in the most suitable locations on the lot to
minimize topographic and vegetation alterations. They must also require all parking areas,
storage buildings and other facilities to be screened by vegetation or topography as much as
practical from view from the public water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions. Such covenants
are subject to city approval.
(Ord.No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(B)), 2-24-1992)
Sec. 78-1279. -Placement of structures on lots.
When more than one setback applies to a site, structures and facilities must be located to meet all
setbacks. Structures shall be located as follows:
(1) Structure and on-site sewerage system setbacks (in feet) from ordinary high water level:
Setbacks
Sewage
Public Water Structure Treatment
Page 2
Classification Unsewered Sewered System
NE 150 150 150
RD 100 75 75
GD 75 75 75
Tributary 100 75 75
(2) Additional structure setbacks. The following additional structure setbacks apply, regardless of the
classification of the water body:
Setback from: Setback
(in feet)
Top of bluff 30
Unplatted cemetery 50
Right-of-way line of federal,state or county highway and local public and private roads 30*
* Except for detached garages on lakeshore lots as regulated in section 78-1435 and except for
structures subject to less restrictive side yard adjacent to street setbacks as regulated in the
various zoning districts.
(3) Bluff impact zones. Structures and accessory facilities,except stairways,landings and lock boxes,
must not be placed within bluff impact zones.
(4) Uses without water-oriented needs. Uses without water-oriented needs must be located on lots
or parcels without public waters frontage, or, if located on lots or parcels with public waters
frontage, must either be set back double the normal ordinary high water level setback or be
substantially screened from view from the water by vegetation or topography, assuming summer,
leaf-on conditions.
(5) Fences, docks, retaining walls. No fence shall be placed within the shore setback zone. Portions
of dock located landward of the OHWL shall be considered as a landing,subject to the regulations
for landings per section 78-1282. Retaining walls shall not be placed within the shore setback
zone.
(6) Average lakeshore setback. No principal or accessory structure shall be located closer to the
lakeshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on
adjacent lots; except that this does not apply to patios and other accessory structures less than
Page 3
42 inches above existing grade, stairways, lifts, landings, lockboxes,flagpoles and pump houses.
Further, the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to
tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most
lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots.
a. In situations where improvement is proposed on a lot adjacent to a vacant lot or right-of-way,
the average lake shore setback shall be equivalent to the setback of the most lakeward
protrusion of the residence building on the immediately adjacent improved lakeshore lot.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(C)), 2-24-1992; Ord. No. 11 3rd series, § 1, 5-24-2004;
Ord. No. 106 3rd series, § 28, 6-10-2013; Ord.No. 157 3rd series, § 1, 8-10-2015)
Sec. 78-1280.-Minimum lowest floor elevations.
All structures located within the Shoreland Overlay District which are subject to the floodplain
regulations of article VIII of this chapter shall be placed at an elevation consistent with the requirements of
that article. The regulatory flood protection elevation shall be established as set forth in section 78-1111.
All structures constructed within the Shoreland Overlay District shall have their lowest floor, including
basement, placed at an elevation no lower than the regulatory flood protection elevation. Where the
regulatory floodplain elevation cannot reasonably be determined,the minimum elevation at which the lowest
floor, including basement, may be placed shall be determined as follows:
(1) For lakes, by placing the lowest floor at a level at least three feet above the highest known water
level, or three feet above the ordinary high water level,whichever is higher.
(2) For rivers and streams, by placing the lowest floor at least three feet above the flood of record.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(D)), 2-24-1992)
Sec. 78-1281. -Water-oriented accessory structures.
The only water-oriented accessory structures allowed to be located nearer the ordinary high water
level than the normal structure setback as specified in this article shall be:
(1) One lockbox no greater than 20 square feet in area and no higher than 48 inches in height;
(2) One flagpole setback from side lot lines a distance no less than the required principal structure
side yard setback for the zoning district; and
(3) One pumphouse no greater than 20 square feet in area and no higher than 48 inches in height.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(E)), 2-24-1992; Ord. No. 106 3rd series, § 27, 6-10-
2013)
Sec. 78-1282. -Driveways,stairways, lifts and landings.
(a) A driveway no wider than eight feet is permitted in the shoreland or tributary setback zone if the
property has no other frontage on or access to a public or private road.
(b) Stairways and lifts are the preferred alternative to major topographic alterations for achieving access
up and down bluffs and steep slopes to shore areas. Stairways, lifts and landings shall be allowed in
the shore setback zone and must meet the following design requirements:
(1) Stairways and lifts must not exceed four feet in width.
(2) Landings for stairways and lifts shall not exceed 32 square feet in area.
Page 4
(3) Canopies or roofs are not allowed on stairways, lifts, or landings.
(4) Stairways, lifts and landings may be either constructed above the ground on posts or pilings or
placed into the ground, provided they are designed and built in a manner that ensures control of
soil erosion.
(5) Stairways, lifts and landings must be located in the most visually inconspicuous portions of lots,
as viewed from the surface of the public water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions, whenever
practical.
(6) Facilities necessary to provide shore area access to physically handicapped persons shall be
allowed, provided that the dimensional and performance standards of subsections(1)—(5)of this
section are completed in addition to the requirements of the Minnesota Regulations, chapter
1340.
(7) A building permit shall be obtained for construction of stairways, lifts and landings regardless of
whether such improvements are constructed above, at or below grade.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(F)), 2-24-1992; Ord. No. 59 3rd series, § 2, 5-11-2009)
Sec. 78-1283. -Steep slopes.
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 other facilities as viewed
from the surface of public waters, assuming summer, leaf-on vegetation.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(G)), 2-24-1992)
Sec. 78-1284. - Height of structures.
No structure within the Shoreland Overlay District shall exceed the height limitations set forth in the
standards for the underlying zoning district.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(H)), 2-24-1992)
Sec. 78-1285. -Vegetation alterations.
(a) No live tree within 75 feet of the shoreline or within the bluff impact zone with a diameter of six inches
or more (or 19 inches in circumference or greater) measured three feet above the ground may be
removed without first obtaining a permit from the city staff, provided that at least the equivalent number
of replacement trees of a size and nature found acceptable to the staff are planted at the same setback
from the shoreline as those removed. Removal of trees that are dead shall not require a permit, but
such trees must be inspected by city staff prior to their removal.
(b) Intensive vegetation clearing within 75 feet of the shoreline, on steep slopes or within the bluff impact
zone within the Shoreland Overlay District is prohibited. Limited clearing of shrubs and trees less than
six inches in diameter and cutting, pruning and trimming of trees of any size is allowed to provide a
view to the water from the principal dwelling site and to accommodate the placement of permitted
stairways and landings,picnic areas,access paths, beach and watercraft access areas,and permitted
lockboxes, provided that the screening of structures, vehicles or other facilities as viewed from the
water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions, is not substantially reduced.
Page 5
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(I)), 2-24-1992; Ord. No. 127 2nd series, § 7, 7-11-1994;
Ord. No. 178 3rd series, § 14, 10-10-2016)
Sec. 78-1286. -Topographic alterations/grading and filling.
(a) Grading and filling and excavations necessary for the construction of structures, sewage treatment
systems, and driveways under validly issued construction permits for these facilities do not require the
issuance of a separate grading and filling permit. However, all grading and filling activity approved
permits for construction of structures, sewage treatment systems, and driveways shall adhere to the
grading and filling standards of this article.
(b) Grading, filling or excavating of more than 50 cubic yards is prohibited within 75 feet of the ordinary
high water level of the public waters enumerated in section 78-1217.
(c) Public and private roads,driveways, parking areas,and public or private watercraft access ramps shall
not be constructed within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of the public waters enumerated in
section 78-1217. If no alternatives exist, such improvements shall be subject to the standard zoning
variance review procedure, and such review shall take into account the following considerations:
(1) Such improvements shall be designed to take advantage of natural vegetation and topography to
achieve maximum screening from view from public waters.
(2) All roads and parking areas shall be designed and constructed to minimize and control erosion to
public waters consistent with the requirements of all agencies with jurisdiction.
(d) Except for those projects requiring permits for construction of structures, sewage treatment systems
and driveways, a land alteration permit will be required as follows:
(1) For movement of up to 50 cubic yards of material within 75 feet of public waters as per item (b)
above, a staff-issued land alteration permit shall be required.
(2) For movement of 51 through 500 cubic yards of material anywhere within the Shoreland Overlay
District, except for within 75 feet of public waters, a staff-issued land alteration permit shall be
required.
(3) For movement of more than 500 cubic yards of material within the Shoreland Overlay District,
conditional use permit approval by the city council is required in addition to the required land
alteration permit.
(e) The following considerations and conditions must be adhered to during the issuance of construction
permits, grading and filling permits, conditional use permits, variances and subdivision approvals:
(1) Grading or filling in any type 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8 wetland must be evaluated to determine how
extensively the proposed activity would affect the following functional qualities of the wetland:
a. Sediment and pollutant trapping and retention;
b. Storage of surface runoff to prevent or reduce flood damage;
c. Fish and wildlife habitat;
d. Recreational use;
e. Shoreline or bank stabilization; and
f. Noteworthiness, including special qualities, such as historic significance, critical habitat for
endangered plants and animals, or others.
This evaluation must also include a determination of whether the wetland alteration being
proposed requires permits, reviews or approvals by other sections of city ordinances or by other
local, state or federal agencies including but not limited to watershed districts, state department
of natural resources, or the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
Page 6
(2) Alterations must be designed and conducted in a manner that ensures only the smallest amount
of bare ground is exposed for the shortest time possible.
(3) Mulches or similar materials must be used, where necessary, for temporary bare soil coverage,
and a permanent vegetation cover must be established as soon as possible.
(4) Methods to minimize soil erosion and to trap sediments before they reach any surface water
feature must be used.
(5) Altered areas must be stabilized to acceptable erosion control standards consistent with the field
office technical guides of the local soil and water conservation districts and the United States Soil
Conservation Service.
(6) Fill or excavated material must not be placed in a manner that creates an unstable slope.
(7) Plans to place fill or excavated material on steep slopes must be reviewed by the city engineer
for continued slope stability and must not create finished slopes of 30 percent or greater.
(8) Fill or excavated material must not be placed in bluff impact zones.
(9) Any alterations below the ordinary high water level of public waters must first be authorized by
the commissioner of the department of natural resources under Minn. Stat. § 103G.245.
(10) Alterations of topography must only be allowed if they are accessory to permitted or conditional
uses and do not adversely affect adjacent or nearby property.
(11) Placement of natural rock riprap, including associated grading of the shoreline and placement of
a filter blanket, is permitted if the finished slope does not exceed three feet horizontal to one foot
vertical, the landward extent of the riprap is within ten feet of the ordinary high water level, and
the height of the riprap above the ordinary high water level does not exceed three feet. A riprap
permit shall be obtained per the requirements of section 78-969.
(f) Excavations where the intended purpose is connection to a public water, such as boat slips, canals,
lagoons and harbors, are prohibited above the ordinary high water level. Such excavations below the
elevation or the ordinary high water level are subject to approval of the department of natural resources
and other agencies with concurrent jurisdiction.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(J)), 2-24-1992; Ord. No. 127 2nd series, § 8, 7-11-1994;
Ord. No. 163 2nd series, § 3, 12-8-1997; Ord.No. 171 2nd series, § 2, 4-4-1998; Ord.No. 28 3rd
series, § 17, 8-22-2005; Ord. No. 133 3rd series, §§ 2, 3, 1-26-2015)
Sec. 78-1287. -Stormwater management.
The following general and specific standards shall apply in addition to those standards found in article
VIII of this chapter and section 82-222:
(1) When possible, existing natural drainageways, wetlands and vegetated soil surfaces must be
used to convey, store, filter and retain stormwater runoff before discharge to public waters.
(2) A development must be planned and conducted in a manner that will minimize the extent of
disturbed areas, runoff velocities and erosion potential, and reduce and delay runoff volumes.
Disturbed areas must be stabilized and protected as soon as possible and facilities or methods
used to retain sediment on the site.
(3) When development density, topographic features, and soil and vegetation conditions are not
sufficient to adequately handle stormwater runoff using natural features and vegetation, various
types of constructed facilities, such as diversions, settling basins, skimming devices, dikes,
waterways and ponds may be used. Preference must be given to designs using surface drainage,
vegetation, and infiltration rather than buried pipes and manmade materials and facilities.
Page 7
(4) When constructed facilities are used to perform water management, documentation must be
provided by a registered professional civil engineer that they are designed and installed consistent
with the field office technical guide of the local soil and water conservation district.
(5) New constructed stormwater outfalls to public waters must provide for filtering or settling of
suspended solids and skimming of surface debris before discharge.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(K)), 2-24-1992)
Sec. 78-1288. -Hardcover limitations.
Hardcover on all lots within the shoreland overlay district shall comply with the requirements of Article
XIII: Stormwater Quality Overlay District.
(Ord. No. 94 3rd series, § 6, 9-24-2012)
Editor's note—Ord.No. 94 3rd series, § 6, adopted Sept. 24, 2012, repealed the former § 78-
1288, and enacted a new § 78-1288 as set out herein. The former section pertained to similar
subject matter and derived from Ord.No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(L)), 2-24-1992; Ord. No.
59 3rd series, § 3, 5-11-2009.
Sec. 78-1289. -Standards for commercial, public and semipublic uses.
(a) Surface-water-oriented commercial uses and public or semipublic uses with similar needs to have
access to and use of public waters may be located on parcels or lots with frontage on public waters, if
permitted by the underlying zoning district standards. Those uses with water-oriented needs must
meet the following standards:
(1) In addition to meeting impervious coverage (hard cover) limits, setbacks, and other zoning
standards in this article, the uses must be designed to incorporate topographic and vegetative
screening of parking areas and structures.
(2) Uses that require shortterm watercraft mooring for patrons must centralize these facilities and
design them to avoid obstructions of navigation and to be the minimum size necessary to meet
the need.
(3) Uses that depend on patrons arriving by watercraft may use the minimum amount of signage and
lighting necessary to convey needed information to the public, subject to the following general
standards:
a. No advertising signs or supporting facilities for signs may be placed in or upon public waters.
Signs conveying information or safety messages may be placed in or on public waters by a
public authority or under a permit issued by the county sheriff.
b. Signs may be placed, when necessary, within the shore setback zone if they are designed
in size to be the minimum necessary to convey needed information. They must only convey
the location and name of the establishment and the general types of goods or services
available.The signs must not contain other detailed information such as product brands and
prices, must not be located higher than ten feet above the ground, and must not exceed 32
square feet in size. If illuminated by artificial lights, the lights must be shielded or directed to
prevent illumination out across public waters.
c. The aggregate square footage of sign space per property shall not exceed the limitations on
sign square footage as regulated in article X, division 4, of this chapter.
d. Nonsign-related outside lighting may be located within the lakeshore setback zone or over
public waters only if it is used primarily to illuminate potential safety hazards and is shielded
Page 8
or otherwise directed to prevent direct illumination out across public waters. This does not
preclude use of navigational lights.
(b) Uses without water-oriented needs must be located on lots or parcels without public waters frontage,
or, if located on lots or parcels with public waters frontage, must either be set back double the normal
ordinary high water level setback or be substantially screened from view from the water by vegetation
or topography, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(M)), 2-24-1992)
Sec. 78-1290. -Agricultural use standards.
(a) When permitted in the underlying zoning district, general cultivation farming, grazing, nurseries,
horticulture, truck farming and wild crop harvesting shall be allowed in the Shoreland Overlay District;
except that no such activity shall occur within the shore setback zone nor on steep slopes or bluff
impact zones. Steep slopes, shore setback zone and bluff impact zones shall be maintained in
permanent vegetation.
(b) Animal feedlots must meet the following standards:
(1) New feedlots, if permitted, must not be located in the shoreland of watercourses or in bluff impact
zones and must meet a minimum setback of 300 feet from the ordinary high water level of all
public waters basins; and
(2) Modifications or expansions to existing feedlots that are located within 300 feet of the ordinary
high water level or within a bluff impact zone are allowed if they do not further encroach into the
existing ordinary high water level setback or encroach on bluff impact zones.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(N)), 2-24-1992)
Sec. 78-1291. - Forest management standards.
The harvesting of timber and associated reforestation must be conducted consistent with the
provisions of the Minnesota Non-Point-Source Pollution Assessment-Forestry and the provisions of Water
Quality in Forest Management"Best Management Practices in Minnesota."
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(0)), 2-24-1992)
Sec. 78-1292.-Extractive use standards.
(a) Site development and restoration plan. An extractive use site development and restoration plan must
be developed, approved and followed over the course of operation of the site. The plan must address
dust, noise, possible pollutant discharges, hours and duration of operation, and anticipated vegetation
and topographic alterations. It must also identify actions to be taken during operation to mitigate
adverse environmental impacts, particularly erosion, and must clearly explain how the site will be
rehabilitated after extractive activities end.
(b) Setbacks for processing machinery. Processing machinery must be located consistent with setback
standards for structures from ordinary high water levels of public waters and from bluffs.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(P)), 2-24-1992)
Sec. 78-1293.-Water supply.
Page 9
Any public or private supply of water for domestic purposes must meet or exceed standards for water
quality of the state department of health and the state pollution control agency.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(Q)), 2-24-1992)
Sec. 78-1294. -Sewage treatment.
Any premises used for human occupancy must be provided with an adequate method of sewage
treatment per chapter 58, article II, of this Code. On-site sewage treatment systems must be set back from
the ordinary high water level in accordance with the setbacks contained in section 78-1279. Nonconforming
sewage treatment systems shall be regulated and upgraded in accordance with section 78-1252.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(R)), 2-24-1992)
Sec. 78-1295. -Significant historic sites.
No structure may be placed on a significant historic site in a manner that affects the values of the site
unless adequate information about the site has been removed and documented in a public repository.
(Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(S)), 2-24-1992)
Secs. 78-1296-78-1320. - Reserved.
Sec. 78-1403. -Lot coverage and massing standards.
In all zoning districts other than the I—Industrial district, all lots that have a gross acreage of less than
two acres shall comply with the following massing standards for structures:
(a) Maximum total footprints allowed.
(1) On lots equal to or greater than 10,000 square feet in area, the total combined footprints of
all principal and accessory structures shall not exceed 20 percent of the gross lot area.
(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.
(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.
(Code 1984, § 10.03(14)(C); Ord. No. 215 2nd series, § 1, 3-11-2002; Ord. No. 99 3rd series, §
1, 1-28-2013; Ord. No. 170 3rd series, § 2, 6-13-2016; Ord.No. 187 3rd series, § 1, 3-13-2017)
Sec. 78-1405. - Nonencroachments.
(a) The following shall not be considered to be encroachments on yard setback requirements:
(1) Chimneys, flues, belt courses, leaders, sills, pilasters, lintels, ornamental features, cornices,
eaves,gutters, and similar building elements, provided they do not extend more than two feet into
a required yard.
(2) Nameplate signs for one-family dwellings subject to the provisions of article X, division 4 of this
chapter; lights for illuminating parking areas, loading areas or yards for safety and security
Page 10
•
purposes, provided the direct source of light is not visible from the public right-of-way or adjacent
residential property and is located at least five feet from the front lot line; public utility poles and
overhead lines; mailboxes.
(3) Terraces, steps, uncovered porches, stoops or similar structures which do not extend above the
height of the ground floor level of the principal building and extend to a distance of not less than
two feet from any lot line. Window wells including those for fire egress which do not extend more
than five feet from the building. Sidewalks, driveways and parking areas when constructed,
located and used in compliance with other provisions contained within chapter 78. Driveways may
extend to within five feet of a side lot line.
(4) In side or rear yards only, bays or cantilevers not to exceed a depth of two feet nor to contain an
aggregate area of more than 20 square feet, fire escapes not to exceed a width of three feet and
a depth of four feet, and open off-street parking.
(5) In rear yards only, balconies, breezeways, detached outdoor picnic shelters, laundry drying
equipment, and recreational equipment except as otherwise regulated; no accessory structure
shall be closer than five feet from a rear lot line.
(5.1)Retaining walls, planters and similar structures, subject to the following provisions:
a. Retaining walls, planters and similar structures may be located in all required yards when all
of the following conditions are met:
1. The structure is located at least ten feet from the edge of the traveled roadway;
2. The structure is not located within a drainage, utility, or other easement, except upon
approval in writing for an encroachment agreement by the city; or similar approval from
another regulatory and/or utility agency;
3. The structure creates no impacts to drainage direction, rate or volume for adjacent
properties.
4. The structure is two feet in height or less above existing grade.
b. Retaining walls, planters and similar structures exceeding two feet in height above existing
ground level or which are located less than five feet from a side property line, shall require a
permit and upon recommendation of the building official may require city council review or a
conditional use permit per the provisions of section 78-967.
c. Retaining walls, planters and similar structures exceeding the allowed height of a fence shall
be located so as to meet the required accessory structure setbacks established for that yard.
(6) In side yards only, no accessory structure shall be closer than ten feet from any side lot line.
(7) Air conditioning or heating equipment may be located within a required yard but shall be located
within five feet of the building it serves; shall not be located within an existing or required drainage
and/or utility easement; and shall be located at least five feet from any lot line.
(8) Fences erected in all zoning districts are considered as a nonencroachment when they conform
to the standards listed below. For the purposes of this section,the following definitions shall apply:
Permanent fence. A fence that is installed in a fixed or enduring manner that is not intended
for a seasonal or temporary purpose.
Temporary fence. A fence that is not permanently secured or anchored to the ground by
posts or affixed footings, and is installed and removed on a limited term or seasonal basis such
as: snow fences, garden fences, seasonal recreational fences such as hockey boards; fences
installed for safety or access management purposes for special events; and fences installed for
the duration of a construction project such as silt fences, erosion control bioretention logs, and
septic drainfield site protection fences.
Fence height. The measurement from the top of any part of the fence, including posts or
other structural supports, lattice, ornate top design elements, and so forth measured to the
Page 11
existing ground level below the fence, as measured perpendicular to the slope (see Drawing).
Exception: Post finials extending above the top of the fence shall not be deemed as part of the
fence for height determination purposes as long as they do not exceed ten inches in width per
finial and do not extend above the top of the fence by more than ten percent of the allowed
maximum fence height at that location.
Drawing: Fence Height Measurement
on Sloped Site
—.1144J
i,-
�� 11
a. Nonlakeshore lots.
1. Fences and walls within a required front yard or side street yard shall not exceed a
height of 42 inches above existing ground level .
2. Fences and walls within a required rear or side yard shall not exceed a height of six feet
above existing ground level.
b. Lakeshore lots.
1. Fences within the required street(rear)yard or side street yard of a lakeshore lot shall
not exceed 42 inches above existing ground level. Exception: A fence not exceeding
six feet in height may be located along the street lot line of a lake frontage lot which
abuts a major thoroughfare. A major thoroughfare for purposes of this section means
any county road or state highway. If such fence involves fill or berming, the total
combined height of both fence and fill shall not exceed six feet above the height of the
crown of the major thoroughfare.
2. Fences within the required side yard of a lakeshore lot shall not exceed six feet in height,
and shall not exceed 42 inches in height for any portion located lakeward of a line drawn
between the most lakeward projection of the fence owner's principal residence structure
and the most lakeward projection of the principal residence structure on the adjacent
property abutting the side yard in which the fence is located.
3. Fences shall not be constructed within the defined lakeshore yard of a lakeshore lot,
i.e., shall not be located within 75 feet of the shoreline for general development lakes,
100 feet for recreational lakes, or 150 feet for natural environment lakes.
4. When the building site of a lakeshore lot is separated from the lakeshore by a public or
private road, the following definitions will apply for fence location purposes subject to
the provisions of section 78-1405(a)(8)a.2: When the yard on the opposite side of the
building site from the lake does not abut a street, such yard shall be considered as a
Page 12
standard rear yard. The yard between the building site and the street shall be
considered as a standard front yard.
c. Special provisions. Split rail fences of no more than three rails within a required front, street
or side street yard may have a maximum top rail height of 48 inches above existing ground
level. Board rail fences within a front, street or side street yard for the specific purpose of
enclosing permitted domestic animals may have a top rail height of 60 inches and shall be
no more than 50 percent opaque.
d. Intersection sightline obstruction prohibited. No fence shall be installed so as to obstruct a
required clear view at street intersections as required by section 78-1371.
e. Fence construction and maintenance.
1. The owner of a fence shall maintain it in a condition of reasonable repair and
appearance and shall not allow it to become or remain in disrepair or in a dangerous
condition.
2. Fences shall be installed with the finished side facing neighboring properties or the
street. The term "finished side" means that side having no structural supports.
3. Fencing materials shall consist of permanent all weather products.
4. Temporary fencing shall not be allowed to remain on the property following final
inspection, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy for a permitted construction project,
or protection of property during a similar project or winter conditions. Winter conditions
shall be defined as October 15 through March 31 of the following year. Temporary
fencing associated with a special event shall be removed within seven days of the end
of such event. Temporary fencing materials shall not be allowed to remain on a
permanent basis on a parcel.
5. Existing fences that are legal nonconforming as to location, height, design or other
characteristics may be replaced in kind.
(9) Entrance monuments, defined for the purpose of this section as a nearly permanent physical
structure or object, natural or artificial, used to depict an entrance to the property, erected in all
residential zoning districts are considered nonencroachments when they conform with the
following standards:
a. Each monument, with a maximum of two per approved driveway access, shall be limited to
a single pillar with a footprint measuring no larger than 25 square feet and no length to
exceed five feet;
b. The monument must be setback a minimum of five feet from all property boundaries and
never fewer than ten feet from the edge of the paved, traveled roadway;
c. Plans and/or elevation views of the proposed monuments are required to be submitted for
approval by the planning director;
d. All signage proposed for the monuments must comply with section 78-1467;
e. The monuments are limited to eight feet in height including any appurtenances. Any
monument exceeding the maximum height must meet principal structure setback
requirements;
f. When more than one monument is proposed, and serving two or fewer residences, a
minimum horizontal width of 16 feet is required between them;
g. When more than one monument is proposed, and serving three or more residences, a
minimum horizontal width of 22 feet is required between them;
h. Lighting is allowed,in conformance with section 78-1573 and at the discretion of the planning
director.
Page 13
i. When a gate is proposed, the following requirements must be met:
1. The gate must open into the property not outward towards the right-of-way, and
2. Gates serving two or fewer residences shall have a minimum horizontal width of 14 feet
in the full open position, and
3. Gates serving three or more residences shall have a minimum horizontal width of 20
feet in the full open position, and
4. For all properties, gate height may not exceed the height of the monument, measured
from grade, unless principal structure setbacks are met(if monuments are not proposed
then gate height shall be regulated in accordance with the fence height regulations of
section 78-1405(8), and
5. Gates must maintain an opacity level of no greater than 25 percent, and
6. For locked and/or secured gates a knox box, meeting the standards set forth by the
police and fire department, must be provided for emergency access, and
7. On major thoroughfares the monuments and gates must be located 40 feet from the
paved,traveled road to allow for vehicle stacking.A major thoroughfare for the purposes
of this section means any county road or state highway.
j. A building permit is required for installation and the property corners must be located for
inspection purposes.
(b) The following shall not be considered to be encroachments on structure height requirements:
(1) Parapet walls that extend no more than three feet above the height of the building.
(2) HVAC cooling towers.
(3) Elevator penthouses.
(Code 1984, § 10.03(15); Ord.No. 211 2nd series, §§ 1-5, 11-26-2001; Ord.No. 12 3rd series,
§ 1, 5-24-2004; Ord.No. 30 3rd series, § 1, 11-28-2005; Ord. No. 43 3rd series, § 1, 2-25-2008;
Ord. No. 106 3rd series, § 22, 6-10-2013; Ord. No. 139 3rd series, § 1, 2-23-2015; Ord.No. 140
3rd series, § 1, 3-23-2015; Ord. No. 170 3rd series, §§ 3, 4, 6-13-2016; Ord. No. 188 3rd series,
§ 1, 3-22-2017; Ord. No. 189 3rd series, § 5, 4-10-2017)
Sec. 78-1605. -Wetland buffer areas and setbacks.
(a) This subsection establishes authority for wetland buffer areas around protected wetlands. Buffer areas
are necessary and beneficial to maintain the health of wetlands. Buffer areas protect the edge of
wetlands from erosion while filtering sediment, chemicals and other nutrients from runoff that drains
into wetlands. Buffer areas can improve the biological diversity and health of a wetland environment
while reducing the adverse impacts of human activities.
(b) All wetlands within the City of Orono are within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD),
which has rules and regulations for the establishment and maintenance of wetland buffers. In an effort
to avoid overlapping or conflicting regulations, the city defers jurisdiction for the establishment and
maintenance of wetland buffers to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. If application of MCWD
buffer regulations is in conflict with city regulations, the Watershed District requirements shall apply.
(c) In order to provide for a minimum level of wetland protection where Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District buffer rules do not provide for adequate separation between wetlands and buildings or other
structures or surfaces, the city shall require setbacks from the delineated edge of a protected wetland
as follows:
Page 14
Minimum distance setback from delineated edge of wetland to any
building(principal or accessory)or other structure, hardcover,
septic systems or wells:
Where no formal buffer exists and
where MCWD does not require a 35 feet
buffer
Where a formal buffer exists or 35 feet or established buffer width plus 10 feet,whichever is
where MCWD buffer is required greater
Areas within the required setback area subject to filling, grading or excavation as part of a construction
project shall be revegetated immediately upon completion of such earthwork.
(d) The City of Orono has established wetland protection strategies in the Orono Surface Water
Management Plan (SWMP) (January 2011). A protection classification has been assigned to each
wetland in Orono based on the stormwater susceptibility and functional assessment for each wetland.
The city has also established additional protection requirements for each classification. The four
protection classifications for all properties except those zoned as"residential"are described as follows:
Additional Protection
Requirements
Protection Susceptibility (B= Bounce=Change in
Description
Classification Rating water level
due to runoff event)
(P = Phosphorus)
B: Maintain bounce at or
below existing
Highly susceptible to both quantity and quality
Highly conditions
"Preserve" impacts from runoff; have the highest degree
Susceptible P: Limit loadings to
of protection
predevelopment loading
(0.14 Lbs/Ac/Yr)
Moderately susceptible to quantity and B: Maintain bounce at or
Moderately quality impacts; protection is less stringent below existing
"Manage 1" provides conditions plus 0.5 foot
Susceptible than Preserve, protection to
maintain their characteristics P: Limit loadings to
predevelopment
Page 15
loadings times 2 (0.28
Lbs/Ac/Yr)
B: Maintain bounce at or
below existing
Less stringent protection than Manage 1 conditions plus 1.0 foot
Slightly
"Manage 2" wetlands; maintenance of characteristics is P: Limit concentration to '
Susceptible
desirable predevelopment
concentrations (200
ppb)
Wetlands are significantly degraded (e.g.,
cultivated or canary grass monotype)or lack B: No quantity
Least requirement
"Manage 3" of wetland characteristics; not typically
Susceptible P: Limit concentration to
impacted by runoff; no quantity and only
225 ppb
limited quality treatment of runoff is required
The protection classification for each wetland will be found on the"Wetland Management Classification
Map & List"which is hereby adopted by reference, a copy of which shall be kept on file in the office of the
city clerk and shall be available for public review during all normal office hours. The Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District required buffer area widths are based on the four protection classifications.
(Ord. No. 28 3rd series, § 1, 8-22-2005; Ord.No. 103 3rd series, § 2, 5-28-2013; Ord. No. 196
3rd series, § 3, 5-22-2017)
ARTICLE XII. -CONSERVATION DESIGN
DIVISION 1. -GENERALLY
Sec. 78-1631. -Purpose and intent.
The City of Orono as a result of the Rural Oasis Study conducted in 2005 finds that there is an intrinsic
link between the natural systems and the valued scenic character that exist throughout the community.The
requirements of this conservation design ordinance are meant to preserve and enhance this
ecological/aesthetic character by requiring: (1) protection and enhancement of drainageways and water
quality; (2)protection and enhancement of ecological communities;(3)reinforcement and establishment of
ecological connections throughout the city; (4) augmentation and preservation of viewsheds including
corridor enclosure and buffering; (5) preservation and improvement of views; and (6) preservation or
reinterpretation of local landmarks.
(Ord. No. 67 3rd series, § 1, 1-11-2010)
Page 16
Sec. 78-1632.-Applicability.
The Conservation Design Master Planning requirements of this article apply to all proposed residential
subdivisions or multi-unit residential developments greater than five acres in total area or guided for urban
density(greater than one unit per two acres).
(Ord. No. 67 3rd series, § 1, 1-11-2010)
Sec. 78-1633.-Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings ascribed
to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
Conservation design means a two-phased approach to design and development that maintains or
improves ecological assets, provides infrastructure that works with the land, and incorporates people's
instinctive desire to experience nature. Some conservation design strategies include: identifying and
avoiding sensitive natural features, planning roads along contours, allowing lots to border natural open
space, integrating ecological stormwater management, using smaller lots, and educating developer and
buyers about the ecological values of the landscape. The first phase entails an inventory and analysis of
the potential development site's natural features, existing land uses, and wetland delineation. The second
phase entails analyzing the design implications of the findings from the initial phase, alternative stormwater
design, and a conceptual design for road and lot layouts.
Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) means the Minnesota Land Cover
Classification System(MLCCS)displays data on natural/semi-natural and cultural cover types at the highest
level of classification. The next four levels of classification each reveal further specifications such as plant
types,soil hydrology,hardcover and plant species.Using MLCCS data is the first step in producing a natural
resource inventory of a development site.
Orono Natural Resource Inventory means an element of the Orono Community Management Plan that
displays the ecological connections within and beyond the City of Orono.
Corridor enclosure means the nature, appearance and relative degrees of screening provided by
roadside vegetation. Corridor enclosure types include:
Open enclosure:Long views beyond the right-of-way, no real sense of corridor enclosure.
Edged enclosure:Solid wall of vegetation along roadside, views focused along corridor.
Tunneled enclosure: Vegetation begins to completely enclose roadway, above and sides, creating a
"small scale" roadway experience.
Varied enclosure: Enclosure changes rapidly along corridor, short stretches of open, edged, and
tunneled corridor.
View analysis means the process of determining whether a view is positive or negative.
Positive views: Views of natural areas, water bodies, established parks, wetlands, rural and historic
land uses.
Negative views:Views of structures, particularly multi-family residential, institutional, and commercial
and industrial uses. Views of power lines, telephone poles and other utility infrastructure.
Landmark preservation and enhancement means preserving and maintaining distinct cultural features,
landmarks and unique points of local character, both natural and man-made, to maintain a familiar sense
of place in the community.
Ecological Management Categories:
Page 17
Level 1: Ecological "off-limits"areas, including wetlands and required buffers, historic drainage.
Level 2: Ecological opportunities, including existing degraded drainageways and existing degraded
ecosystem remnants.
Level 3: Ecological possibilities: Areas suitable for stormwater treatment.
Note:These Ecological Management Categories are not intended to directly correlate with MLCCS M-
34X Natural Community Quality Modifiers.
Significant tree stand means a grouping or cluster of coniferous and/or deciduous trees with
contiguous crown cover, occupying 500 or more square feet of property,which are comprised of deciduous
trees six inches or larger in diameter (d.b.h.) or coniferous trees 12 feet or more in height. Additionally,
those forest or woodland remnants identified as high, moderate or good quality in the Orono Natural
Resources Inventory shall be considered as significant tree stands.
(Ord. No. 67 3rd series, § 1, 1-11-2010; Ord. No. 94 3rd series, § 9, 9-24-2012)
DIVISION 2. -BASIC APPLICATION AND PLAN REQUIREMENTS
Sec. 78-1634. -Application requirements and procedures.
The developer shall follow the steps outlined below as part of the development review process:
(1) Review and respond to the Goals and Policies for Environmental Protection and Natural Resource
Management as established in the Orono Community Management Plan and the
recommendations contained within the Orono Natural Resources Inventory. The intent is to
establish the property's ecological connections both within Orono and as part of the regional
ecological system.
(2) If the property exists adjacent to a documented corridor in the Rural Oasis Study, review and
respond to the existing aesthetic and ecological analysis.
(3) If the property is not adjacent to a documented corridor in the Rural Oasis Study, developer shall
have a qualified consultant prepare a similar analysis and submit it to the city for review. This
analysis shall include the documentation of views, corridor enclosure, and landmarks through a
plan analysis and photographs. Developer shall be charged a standard fee established in the city
fee schedule to cover the expenses of the city in hiring a consultant to review the ecological site
analysis submitted by the developer.
(4) Additionally, submit a natural resources inventory of the site, including all of the following
elements:
a. Review of the MLCCS data pertinent to the site.
b. Tree survey, including all significant individual trees greater than six feet diameter, and
stands of trees, identifying tree species and size.
c. Wetland inventory, including delineation reports.
d. Topographic survey indicating existing drainage patterns.
e. Analysis of the site based on the findings and recommendations of the Orono Natural
Resources Inventory with regards to:
• Conceptual greenways and open space corridors;
• Existence of rare plant communities;
Page 18
• Potential need for proactive management and protection.
(Ord. No. 67 3rd series, § 1, 1-11-2010)
Sec. 78-1635. -Basic Conservation Design Master Plan requirements and evaluation criteria.
The developer shall prepare a Conservation Design Master Plan for development of the property,
consisting of written and visual documentation including maps in an acceptable electronic format,
addressing the following topics:
(1) Consideration of the existing drainage system;
(2) Establishment of a stormwater management system, using multi-cell treatment principles, and
defining proposed methods of stormwater phosphorus reduction;
(3) Removal of invasive species and diseased trees;
(4) Protection of significant tree stands and woodlands that support scenic and/or ecological goals,
including mitigation of any such stands to be impacted by development activities;
(5) Protection of existing wetlands, including augmentation of buffers, mitigation of impacts, and
enhancement of degraded systems;
(6) Justification and mitigation of any negative impact to ecological communities. "Negative impact"
includes any modification to a lower level of ecological community quality, as described by the
Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (M-34X Modifiers);
(7) Maintenance of ecological connections through site design, as shown on the Orono Natural
Resource Inventory;
(8) Maintenance and protection of existing positive views, and mitigation of any existing or proposed
negative views using appropriate measures such as site layout, screening, building design and
coloration, etc.; and
(9) Preservation or reinterpretation of existing landmarks.
The planning commission and city council shall evaluate the Conservation Design Master Plan to
determine whether the proposed development:
(1) Preserves existing drainage patterns and enhances stormwater collection and conveyance by
applying an ecologically-based multi-cell stormwater management system that improves
ecosystems by reducing reliance on manmade infrastructure, reducing downstream runoff of
contaminants, and enhancing ecological connections;
(2) Includes a program for the removal of invasive species and diseased trees; protects significant
tree stands and woodlands that support scenic and/or ecological goals; and includes mitigation
of any such stands that will be impacted by development activities;
(3) Protects existing wetlands by implementing new buffers or augmenting existing buffers; mitigates
identified wetland impacts; and enhances degraded wetland systems;
(4) Results in no negative impact to ecological communities of Ecological Management Categories
1 and 2; results in no negative modification of any ecological communities as described by the
Minnesota Land Cover Classification System; and establishes, maintains and improves native
ecological communities including natural and semi-natural areas to provide wildlife habitat and
support natural ecological functions(i.e. drainage, filtering, buffering, etc.);
(5) Establishes or maintains ecological connections through site design, as shown on the Orono
Natural Resource Inventory that will enhance stormwater collection and conveyance, promote
ecological and wildlife corridors, and provide recreational opportunities for residents;
Page 19
(6) Preserves and where appropriate augments or improves roadway corridor enclosure to promote
community aesthetics associated with the city's rural character; preserves open rural views and
other aesthetic elements of the landscape; and mitigates the negative visual impacts of
development;
(7) Preserves, maintains,or reinterprets existing landmarks and unique points of local character,and
preserves distinct cultural features that will maintain a familiar sense of place in the community.
(Ord. No. 67 3rd series, § 1, 1-11-2010)
DIVISION 3. -DENSITY BONUS STANDARDS
Sec. 78-1636. - Density bonuses for urban density development.
For residential development in Orono's defined urban area (zoning districts allowing densities in
excess of one unit per two acres, and including properties identified in the Orono Community Management
Plan for conversion to urban density) within the ranges of the guided density a density bonus may be
allowed if the city council finds that the performance bonus requirements of this division have been met.
The city council shall determine the extent of density bonus awarded for such properties. Example:
Properties guided in the Community Management Plan for a density range of two—four units per acre have
a base density of two units per acre; while the high end of the density range is not guaranteed, the city
council at its discretion may allow development at a final density of up to four units per acre through the
performance bonus process.
(Ord. No. 67 3rd series, § 1, 1-11-2010)
Sec. 78-1637.-Performance bonus requirements.
Within the urban density area, developers have the opportunity to increase the base density by going
above and beyond the Basic Conservation Design Master Plan requirement. By implementing a
combination of development enhancements that not only preserve but improve the natural characteristics
of the property or preserve and enhance existing landmarks, the developer shall become eligible for a
density bonus. The extent of such density bonus shall be determined by the city council. Development
enhancements include but are not necessarily limited to the following:
(1) Reforestation beyond existing woodland limits;
(2) Water quality improvements;
(3) Improvements in ecological grade of existing communities;
(4) Upgrading of edge buffering to maximum, or tunneled, character; and
(5) Major preservation or enhancement of existing landmarks.
(Ord. No. 67 3rd series, § 1, 1-11-2010)
DIVISION 4. -LONG-TERM PRESERVATION
Sec. 78-1638.-Preservation requirements.
Page 20
The developer shall establish and implement measures that will ensure the preservation and
maintenance of those elements of the development that are determined to require long-term or permanent
protection from development or misuse. Such measures may include but are not limited to: conservation
easements; deed restrictions; private covenants; transfer of ownership to agencies such as the Minnesota
Land Trust or the Nature Conservancy, or to the city via dedication, etc.
(Ord. No. 67 3rd series, § 1, 1-11-2010)
Sec. 78-1639. -Buyer education.
The developer shall establish covenants documenting the elements of the development to be protected
and how they are to be protected, and shall establish a defined program for education of the initial
purchasers of lots within the development as to the limitations that affect future use of the property.
(Ord. No. 67 3rd series, § 1, 1-11-2010)
DIVISION 5. - RESOURCES
Sec. 78-1640. - Resources.
The primary references for facilitating the conservation design process include the following:
• Orono Rural Oasis Study(DSU, 2005).
• 2008-2030 City of Orono Community Management Plan, Chapter 3A—Environmental Protection
Plan (City of Orono, 2009).
• Orono Natural Resources Inventory (Hennepin County Department of Environmental
Services/Bonestroo Natural Resources Group, 2006).
• Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS).
(Ord. No. 67 3rd series, § 1, 1-11-2010)
Secs. 78-1641-78-1669. -Reserved.
DIVISION 2. -GENERAL REGULATIONS FOR ALL PARCELS WITHIN THE STORM WATER QUALITY OVERLAY
DISTRICT
Sec. 78-1680. - Hardcover restriction zones.
Within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level (OHWL)of any lake or tributary, and within any bluff or
shore impact zone, no hardcover shall be placed, located or constructed, except for driveways, stairways,
lifts, landings and lockboxes as regulated by the shoreland overlay district.
(Ord. No. 94 3rd series, § 11, 9-24-2012)
Sec. 78-1681.-Driveways, in general.
Page 21
All driveways shall comply with the following minimum dimensional standards:
(1) Driveways serving end loading garages shall maintain a width equivalent to the width of all
overhead doors extending 15 feet out from the garage doors.
(2) Driveways serving side loading garages shall provide a minimum turn around or back up depth
of 20 feet, as measured from the garage door(s).
(3) Minimum driveway taper ratio shall be 2:1.
(4) Driveways shall be at least eight feet in width at the street or private road.
(5) A turnaround shall be provided for a driveway with direct access to an arterial or collector
roadway, or for a side load garage as determined necessary by the city planner. The minimum
dimensions of the turnaround shall be eight feet in width by 12 feet in depth.
(6) 'Wheel strip"driveways are allowed, but the entire width of the driveway(from outside to outside
of the strips)will be considered hardcover.
Drawing 1 is included for illustrative purposes.
Drawing 1: Minimum Driveway Standards
i—a. 8•
Backup APion
m (if RegJied)
'., e z/'. .' ' ' ' , i/ 8k8'Minimum
i Li \ 1
h
Side Lona s s
I
. ... A ion Depth 20'Min.
1
End Load 1
/ 4'Rad2
••( Minimum Wath of (Mn)
6 Garage Mot
U
s g
Minimum Tariki/ E Din-way Meth
2:i—/ (2 F `a 8'Minimum
J (20'Mawmum)
Driveway Width -----a 1 b
8'Minimum
S'Rad.—+6 i S Rad'-. .41 �..
(20'Maximum) 1.; Edge of Right-Of-Way
(Lot Une)
i
Minimum Driveway Standards
(Ord. No. 94 3rd series, § 11, 9-24-2012)
Page 22
Sec. 78-1682. -Shared driveways.
Where one or more properties (referred to as secondary property) gain its driveway access from an
adjacent property(a primary property) by virtue of a driveway easement, the following shall apply:
(1) The portion of the shared driveway on the primary property that serves both primary and
secondary property shall be considered hardcover for the primary property.
(2) That portion of the driveway on the primary property that serves only secondary property shall
not be considered hardcover for either primary or secondary property.
Drawing 2 is included for illustrative purposes.
Drawing 2: Driveway Easements
rp-r+r r-r-r P.O,r"II c1T CV"C
House C House
'7
t.is L/11 f.-/-Z.' GataQe 7
Lt. uti tt J aaaata
Encroached / Benefitted
Property Property
L _ 1 J
r^r.-.-r r r•r re-A ewe crc e c'�t Y�
rHOUSe C House
�rnnRRly/ r
�11J-L 1 Lf1 LJ-orGare k Garage
4'4[4444 d t \3.]Yll] Vryi
Encroached Benefitted
Property Property
J p
1
L J. J
-Exckrdade area•not covered in area
a
re
har&OVe(of cnaoached k,t.Nw
not added to the hardcover cakuabons
for the benefitted property.
Driveway Easements
(Ord. No. 94 3rd series, § 11, 9-24-2012)
Sec. 78-1683.-Standard hardcover inclusions.
The following hardcover items shall be included in proposed hardcover calculations regardless of
whether the noted features are proposed to be constructed at the time of a building permit application:
Page 23
(1) Proof of a two-car garage (detached or attached);
(2) A driveway for all garages, a minimum of 12 feet in width, subject to the standards in section 78-
1681;
(3) A 24-inch wide sidewalk connecting the front door to the driveway;
(4) The minimum stairway or landing at all exterior doors as required by the building code; and
(5) Existing hardcover which encroaches(legally or illegally)onto an adjacent parcel or parcels.
a. In such cases of encroachment, the square footage of all encroaching hardcover shall be
added to the overall hardcover on the subject lot;
b. No credit shall be given towards the overall lot size of the subject lot.
(Ord. No. 94 3rd series, § 11, 9-24-2012)
Sec. 78-1684. -Standard hardcover exclusions.
Landscaping with permeable lining shall not be considered hardcover. Additionally, the following
hardcover items shall be excluded from hardcover calculations:
(1) Roads, trails, sidewalks, utilities and other hardcover encroachments intended for the public's
benefit;
(2) Hardcover encroachments created by improvements on adjacent property not owned by the
subject landowner;
a. In such cases of encroachment, the square footage of all encroaching hardcover shall not
be added to the overall hardcover counting against the subject lot;
b. The land area upon which the encroachment rests shall count towards the overall lot area
for the subject lot.
(3) Retaining walls;
(4) Handicapped ramps with a pervious surface below; and
(5) The first 100 square feet of pervious paver patios/walkways or the first 100 square feet of deck
with a minimum one-fourth-inch spacing between boards and a pervious surface below the
decking.
(Ord. No. 94 3rd series, § 11, 9-24-2012)
Sec. 78-1685. -Massing standards.
(1) Non-industrial zoning districts. Except for parcels zoned industrial, all lots in the stormwater quality
overlay district that have a gross acreage of less than two acres shall comply with the following
massing standards for structures.
a. Maximum total footprints allowed.
1. On lots equal to or greater than 10,000 square feet in area, the total combined footprints of
all principal and accessory structures shall not exceed 20 percent of the gross lot area.
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.
b. Calculation of massing. The following shall be included in the calculation of the total combined
footprints by structures:
Page 24
1. All roofed structures where the highest point of the roof is more than six feet above existing
ground level.
(2) Industrial zoning district. For parcels zoned industrial, the following massing standards for structures
shall apply.
a. On lots equal to or less than three acres in area, the total combined footprints of all principal and
accessory structures shall not exceed 35 percent of the gross lot area.
b. On lots greater than three acres in area, the total combined footprints of all principal and
accessory structures shall not exceed 45 percent of the gross lot area; except that when the total
building floor area on a site is contained within a single building, and when the total area used for
loading terminals, docks and berths is completely enclosed within the same single building, a lot
coverage of not more than 60 percent of the gross lot area will be permitted.
(Ord. No. 94 3rd series, § 11, 9-24-2012; Ord. No. 170 3rd series, § 5, 6-13-2016; Ord. No. 187
3rd series, § 2, 3-13-2017)
Sec. 78-1686. -Variances.
Variances to hardcover, if granted on lots within the stormwater quality overlay district, may be subject
to mitigation measures deemed appropriate by the city council to offset the impacts generated by the
proposed additional hardcover.
(Ord. No. 94 3rd series, § 11, 9-24-2012)
Secs. 78-1687-78-1699. - Reserved.
DIVISION 3. - ROADS AND PUBLIC WAYS
Sec. 82-281. -Design standards.
(a) Generally. In order to provide for roads of suitable location, width and improvement to accommodate
prospective traffic and afford satisfactory access to police, firefighting, snow removal, sanitation and
road maintenance equipment, and to coordinate roads so as to compose a convenient system and
avoid undue hardships to adjoining properties, the following design standards for roads are required:
(1) Road surfacing and improvements. After the sewer and water utilities have been installed by the
subdivider, the subdivider shall construct all road pavement, shoulders, drainage improvements
and structures, curbs, culs-de-sac, and sidewalks in conformance with all construction standards
and specifications adopted by the city and shall be incorporated into the construction plans
required to be submitted to the subdivider for final subdivision approval.
(2) Rights-of-way. Rights-of-way shall be in accordance with the following performance standard:
a. Minimum right-of-way widths.
Principal arterial, intermediate arterial As recommended by the State Department of Transportation
Minor arterial 80 feet
Page 25
Collector 70 feet
Local 50 feet
Parkway 100 feet
Culs-de-sac 50 feet radius
b. Rights-of-way are needed for future roadways in the opinion of the city.
c. Right-of-way widths or additional widths in existing rights-of-way in excess of the standards
designated in this chapter when, due to topography, additional width is necessary to provide
adequate earth slopes. Such slopes shall not be in excess of 3:1.
(b) Railroads and limited-access roadways. ((this section removed by staff))
(c) Intersections.
(1) Streets shall be laid out so as to intersect as nearly as possible at right angles. A proposed
intersection of two new streets at an angle or less than 75 degrees shall not be acceptable. An
oblique street should be curved approaching an intersection and should be approximately at right
angles for at least 100 feet from the intersection. Not more than two streets shall intersect at any
one point unless specifically approved by the city.
(2) Proposed new intersections along one side of an existing street shall coincide with any existing
intersections on the opposite side of such street. Intersection jogs with centerline offsets of less
than 150 feet shall not be permitted, except where the intersected street has separated dual
drives without median breaks at either intersection. Where streets intersect major streets, their
alignment shall be continuous. Intersections of arterial roadways shall be at least 800 feet apart.
(3) Minimum curb radius at the intersection of two local streets shall be at least 15 feet, and minimum
curb radius at an intersection involving a collector street or local streets in a commercial or
industrial area shall be at least 25 feet.Alley intersections and abrupt changes in alignment within
a block shall have the corners cut off in accordance with standard engineering practice to permit
safe vehicular movement.
(4) Intersections shall be designed with a flat stopping area of at least 30 feet in a residential area
and 60 feet in a commercial or industrial area. The stopping area shall be designed to provide a
maximum grade of two percent.
(5) Where any street intersection will involve earth banks or existing vegetation inside any lot corner
that would create a traffic hazard by limiting visibility, the subdivider shall cut such ground and/or
vegetation (including trees) in connection with the grading of the right-of-way to the extent
deemed necessary by the city to provide an adequate sight distance.
(6) The crown of all streets, including intersections, shall be three percent or less.
(d) Typical section. The typical section indicated in this subsection is as determined for a clay subgrade
(A-6 soil classification)and may be subject to change. Soil borings may be required to be determined
by the city.
(1) Private street, residential
R.O.W.* M.P.W.**
Units Section
(feet) (feet)
Page 26
8-inch class 5 100%crushed
3-6 50 24
3-inch 2341 bituminous surface
8-inch class 5 100%crushed
Over 7 50 28
3-inch 2341 bituminous surface
(2) Public street, residential
R.O.W.* M.P.W.**
Units Section
(feet) (feet)
8-inch class 5 100%crushed
3-10 50 28
3-inch 2341 bituminous surface
8-inch class 5 100%crushed
Over 10 50 32
3-inch 2341 bituminous surface
Maximum cul-de-sac length = 1,000 feet
Maximum number of units on cul-de-sac= 10
(3) Public street, commercial or industrial
R.O.W.* M.P.W.**
UnitsSection
(feet) (feet)
8-inch class 4
1+ 70 32 8-inch class 5 100%crushed
4-inch 2341 bituminous surface
I i
*Right-of-Way Width
**Minimum Paved Width
(e) Horizontal and vertical control. Horizontal and vertical control shall be as follows:
V Vertical Horizontal
Design Control Control
Functional
Speed Maximum Minimum
Class
(mph) Gradient Radius
(percent) (feet)
Private street
(residential)
30 12 275
I I
Page 27
Public street
30 10 275
(residential)
Public street
(commercial and 40 8 400
industrial)
(Code 1984, § 11.33)
Sec. 82-282. -Off-site premises; roadways.
(a) Access to improved public or private roadways. No subdivision shall be approved unless the area to
be subdivided shall have adequate access from an existing publicly dedicated and opened roadway
or on a private roadway open to travel or vehicular use pursuant to an easement between persons or
between persons and the city. Such roadway must be suitably improved as required by the city, the
state or the county. If the public roadway, including but not limited to existing bridges, drainage
structures, lighting, shoulders, base, pavement, alignment or sight distance, is not suitable to handle
the proposed additional vehicular traffic from the subdivision, the subdivider at his expense will be
responsible for first improving the public roadway to a standard acceptable to the city, to ensure that
the health, safety and welfare of the citizens presently using the roadway and in the future will be
protected and will not be adversely affected by the increased use of the roadway caused by the
subdivision.This improvement shall be accomplished prior to final subdivision approval unless the city
agrees and the subdivider provides a suitable performance bond to complete the improvements in the
subdivider's agreement.
(b) Access to improved public roadways over existing private roadways. Wherever the area to be
subdivided is to utilize an existing private roadway in order to gain access to the public roadway, such
private roadway shall be suitably improved as provided in this section for public roadways.
(Code 1984, § 11.32(1))
Sec. 82-283. -On-site roadways.
(a) Grading and improvement plan. Roadways shall be graded and improved to conform to the city's
construction standards and specifications and shall be approved as to design and specifications by
the city engineer, in accordance with the construction plans required to be submitted prior to final
subdivision approval.
(b) Topography and arrangement.
(1) Roadways shall be related appropriately to the topography. Roadways shall be curved wherever
possible to avoid conformity of lot appearance. All roadways shall be arranged so as to obtain as
many as possible of the building sites at or above the grades of the street. Grades of streets shall
conform as closely as possible to the original topography. A combination of steep grades and
curves shall be avoided.
(2) All streets shall be properly integrated with the existing and proposed system of thoroughfares
and dedicated rights-of-way as established in the comprehensive municipal plan.
(3) All thoroughfares shall be properly related to specific traffic generators, such as industries,
business districts, schools, churches, and shopping centers; to population densities; and to the
pattern of existing and proposed land uses.
Page 28
(4) Roadways shall be laid out to conform as much as possible to the topography, to discourage use
by through traffic, to permit efficient drainage and utility systems, and to require the minimum
number of roadways necessary to provide convenient and safe access to property.
(5) The gridiron roadway pattern need not necessarily be adhered to, and the use of curvilinear
roadways or U-shaped roadways shall be encouraged where such use will result in a more
desirable layout.
(6) Culs-de-sac shall be discouraged; proposed roadways shall be extended to the boundary lines of
the tract to be subdivided unless prevented by topography or other physical conditions or unless
in the opinion of the city such extension is not necessary or desirable for the coordination of the
layout of the subdivision with the existing layout or the most advantageous future development of
adjacent tracts.
(7) In business and industrial developments, the roadways and other accessways shall be planned
in connection with the grouping of buildings, location of rail facilities, and the provisions of alleys,
truck loading and maneuvering areas, and walks and parking areas so as to minimize conflict of
movement between the various types of traffic, including pedestrian.
(c) Blocks.
(1) Blocks shall have sufficient width to provide for two tiers of lots of appropriate depths. Exceptions
to this prescribed block width shall be permitted in blocks adjacent to arterial roadways, railroads
or waterways.
(2) The lengths, widths, and shapes of blocks shall be such as are appropriate for the locality and
the type of development contemplated; but block lengths in residential areas shall not exceed
1,500 feet or 12 times the minimum lot width required in the zoning district, nor be less than 400
feet in length from centerline to centerline of adjacent streets.Wherever practicable, blocks along
arterial collector roadways shall be not less than 1,000 feet in length.
(3) In all blocks, the city shall require the reservation of an easement through the block to
accommodate utilities, drainage facilities or pedestrian traffic. Pedestrian ways or crosswalks, not
less than ten feet wide, may be required by the city through the center of blocks more than 800
feet long where deemed essential to provide circulation of access to schools, playgrounds,
shopping centers,transportation or other community facilities. Blocks designed for industrial uses
shall be of such length and width as may be determined suitable by the city for prospective use.
(d) Access to primary arterials. Where a subdivision borders on or contains an existing or proposed
arterial, the city may require that access to such roadways be limited by one of the following means:
(1) The subdivision of lots so as to back onto the arterials and front onto a parallel local or collector
roadway; no access shall be provided from the arterial, and screening shall be provided in a strip
of land along the rear property line of such lots.
(2) A series of culs-de-sac, U-shaped streets, or short loops entered from and designed generally at
right angles to such a parallel street, with the rear lines of their terminal lots backing onto the
arterial.
(3) A marginal-access or service road separated from the arterial by a planting or grass strip and
having access to the arterial at suitable points.
(e) Road names and street addresses. The sketch plan as submitted shall not indicate any names upon
proposed streets. The city shall name all roads at the time of preliminary subdivision approval and
assign street addresses. The local postmaster shall be consulted by the zoning administrator. Names
shall be sufficiently different in sound and in spelling from other road names in the area so as not to
cause confusion. A road which is or is planned as a continuation of an existing road shall bear the
same name.
(f) Road regulatory signs.The subdivider shall deposit with the city at the time of final subdivision approval
the sum of money as determined by the city for each road sign and the installation cost. The city shall
install all road signs before issuance of certificates of occupancy for any residence on the streets
Page 29
approved.The city shall place all signs at the developer's expense at all intersections within or abutting
the subdivision, the type and location of which shall be approved by the city.
(g) Reserve strips. The creation of reserve strips shall not be permitted adjacent to a proposed street in
such a manner as to deny access from adjacent property to such street.
(h) Construction of roads and dead-end roads.
(1) Construction of roads. The arrangement of streets shall provide for the continuation of streets
between adjacent properties when such continuation is necessary for convenient movement of
traffic, effective fire protection, for efficient provision of utilities, and where such continuation is in
accordance with the city comprehensive municipal plan. If the adjacent property is undeveloped
and the street must be a dead-end street temporarily, the right-of-way shall be extended to the
property line. The city may limit the length of temporary dead-end streets in accordance with this
chapter.
(2) Dead-end roads (permanent). Where a road does not extend to the boundary of the subdivision
and its continuation is not required by the city for access to adjoining property, its terminus shall
normally not be nearer to such boundary than 50 feet. However, the city may require the
reservation of an appropriate easement to accommodate drainage facilities, pedestrian traffic or
utilities. A cul-de-sac shall be provided at the end of a permanent dead-end street in accordance
with the city's construction standards and specifications. For greater convenience to traffic and
more effective police and fire protection, permanent dead-end streets shall, in general, be
discouraged and where allowed be limited in length in accordance with this chapter.
(Code 1984, § 11.32(2))
Sec. 82-284. -Road dedication and reservations.
(a) New perimeter streets. Street systems in new subdivisions shall be laid out so as to eliminate or avoid
new perimeter half-streets. Where an existing half-street is adjacent to a new subdivision, the other
half of the street shall be improved and dedicated by the subdivider. The city may authorize a new
perimeter street where the subdivider improves and dedicates the entire required street right-of-way
width within his own subdivision boundaries.
(b) Widening and realignment of existing roads. Where a subdivision borders an existing narrow road or
when the comprehensive municipal plan or some other agency indicates plans for realignment or
widening a road that would require use of some of the land in the subdivision, the subdivider shall be
required to improve and dedicate at his expense such areas for widening or realignment of such roads.
Such frontage roads and streets shall be improved and dedicated by the subdivider at his own expense
to the full width as required by this chapter.
(c) Use of reserved land. Land reserved for any road purposes may not be counted in satisfying yard or
area requirements of chapter 78, whether the land is to be dedicated to the city in fee simple or an
easement is granted to the city.
(Code 1984, § 11.40)
Sec. 82-285. -Pedestrian access.
The council may require sidewalks or other pedestrian pathways in order to facilitate pedestrian access
from the roads to schools, parks, playgrounds or other nearby roads at least five feet in width. Sidewalks
shall be five feet in width and pathways no more than eight feet in width.
(Code 1984, § 11.44)
Page 30
Secs. 82-286-82-299. -Reserved.
Page 31
• %.* •,i� v ♦ a, i •• • t• � �'
••,; . • . . . . w.••• PC ,
ri
.. , . ot
� 4' ......1.015, • Exhibit E
w•. ' - `�' V. • #17-3945
• A
t rte' ' .•• p.. ..
•
.1 k. le I * * ilt
+. .4' ,�tr4 'it
eA
4
. C 'rx A... `,Y �I YACAr 1-. �., " PIR •
^ 1Pit•
=.1 =. .At - At r )
fii
Illie
,w•a .....
a 1,- ._
a
t..
- mom, . , ,,, . . .
-'t
P
` 1
7
Looting into existing driveway for J 14/06/20 1
2709 Walters Port.
2707 WP on right
i<,, / 'hII, {
.,�? •
j
k' AK 's , rims=. —tet`. O
CNI
v.
,.. IT,' ,,, - .' . f \l, .l
•
` �yy�y*r V tom ?
'`:1k..Vi.. ‘ V: ...:'..'..1.';•11;;. : : ''''', ': . , I. , . , ",,.., ° ''' il
•
. • •
•x , .- , .. ,moi, �.. i ,•
, ,?... ‘ ,' 4 iriltiVie..,•il . . .... _' 4,,,,.. 1, ,,,,• c, '4,4,',"- '. - ,,i,-, ,," ;I , ., • ,, *.- n,,, J.'',
r 5 �Y y •
M ;
Pi
'' 4..4.
fii+�'�a� 'f`" .! ; Ri
c.
4
J. r;; �i K=r ;n i0.: a .te- ��
,;: f •
, r b� z - •
r.
�- F � Via. ^ I II �i4. t
• •
,� 1,/il, t,'� 1 •
T
jor i 'o- .r'Jt' "! -t' VF�7. .I Q
lir
+or � i trilt .� :. 'FS a r r
s. , •
, '11, ►Rd 1
sy•
t
.T
A i wil ,
it •;qr'. ?-. •- ' /4/ ' v -' . !-'•.
CS
,Ii
NiL
il
i
( L. '
•• M _•_� r •t •
t it
•
4,,,.. 0. ,,
.. . . . 1 , t , N
�. 4 iI
y w 2, . .
5. ,
t >~apt , .
/ t 1 1 IP 1
. . -- 11 1 ' f I f A
,4, - , .- � : . tic:• X15: z , 1, 1 �� . r � ' r �
o .r
.,._ -..,
IN
• d+, r i,,
�' 1 mss.- 1,1i,
+�, J , ,
'"�ti ,;°' i� + �� i til, ,
II
;.,
•
ti
N
` ,
y
E
d4 r ¶ c
-
�' 'I..' ♦ •
remom•
S. t•2h _ _„.•,/,, r { ( t
• 1 r
ti"
'� ,til,, . <-, , k `v, A.
. .
iy Xw.:)::-,..4.,
r Z'A `J •1 ' # i
e _y �a may - • •>
'71',. t (, „,,,,..J• - f'�
'!' `ie s*R 7;---ii
•. ,,, „. .,_,, ,1 1 ,
it
a:'
„. . -,,,,,,..„,,,...,,: ,,, ,
,, , ,..
_ , .,:4,.... _,,,t.,,,, ,,.-
- .. },
I
. '_ t'.-.�. 1 w'•r • •
v `
1 7�'t,'. '�`''Loin mor...r.a•.:..,.... s.
__ ( t • `te t
;#*
.. I Y" . t ., I k'K
c ,,,
I' .�= > '
•
•
l i 1
-„tit.
•6r '% 1
' .
41. - ►`,
"14 _ ., ,
Fe.• is 's�`t ` _ ',A, 1 t , - • U _ '. ' •
�A i, "1,.� r t n , - � r 4?,1' •4 1`l
LT-0E-9
3Nb'� 3�N3d /±UOd S�iI�b'M
:Ag NDISHU
up
O IDco_ CO
W
It
x
_ ___-____.__, A
ii
_ 1
171
-w __
i SWIM > _ AI
W111.., -:,11 w CC
•
111
Q
[MN
EMI
'"' a _ ;- _II W LL_�( - I_
l f�Il _ - J
� _ =
N-
CO
1,,.- -4.
Liii
e_ „
1
___
II_I
1_ 1._,-,
i ' - __,
,-, i
1
, 0
----
__
____1
,, ,
pi
i ! `I I I
r- ti
'M �.'� P "$"'3'Sa«'-- t - t` �"; ,a ..,,,,,i,,,. .,:
�,mi a ....:,4,-,,,,,''.. ¢� . a , d,w , nc
x � ¢ x E• „rl , � r-.l+w •4 - . ,„ _ 'L ,rt"� -.. Lt _ yy t ,. `, r V
,Lk
40
,� , ' - Exhibit G
� �• :�'',....'4'44.. � �4 �- � 7-3945
. ,..,_ . .
�. Pi4. .. ,, -A', £ � + le`. • x!'11.p�17 { +F
it,
� •" � P �� � � 2r7,..
-....',,,.,•:--,'
� .a�,"��'c a.,...r �:A r��X" "`"' °�.�;.:i..• J C � ..w `�` 'fi� -r-xa �'�t�.' W ',,-:,,�y � .�A'aw� r `�'J�
4_
y d , t y�
tW.s y' + w .'l. r 'i' ;fw �� xt.
Itir
♦ H
,.,. ..:1,:‘,,...;,::„...•-'.... -: . . ....1.'"-::,'",.
-.
' '
iii
4i;...�c,.f # , `', •4 y4`x 'i.,-,.4.•,•,,,,,--.1. . '\..$ },,r. ;4'". -'3; , ''''h - y �`x yr
w� '''''''.10''.
.r r: --''''''''-'1.--'''."'
.,..,. x"'_;.' r:e�` ',Al*. 6. r' „ '"'`., � } ,zf,, i g _ ,qye7-7....."."
!. , _ ^aj.I
7::. ,,,i,,,„... ..,.„,,,,..:„.:,,,,ci,,,.:„.7,...1"-" ti-4.,,if,,i,,,1'''''r,,,,y„,..,-,1,..„... ...... r,--7,44
M fls 4. '..- .1 ( } -'l.• yy t_ �'
a . d. a. ?R }¢ # '„,,i''_':
X tihcY •
1:
k *
7C
r > -,*9",-..;1,..---., fla J ;,�,,, '-'4r,;„.:!. y,,
•
.w tea r� me: � - •tiligwa PY P✓
;I
,_
g#,.... _ . 4.*• 1:''':„:„',..' '',-'..i: ; ty.t•.4 '',. . ... ' .'.0.4:::''''.-;0,
,
-- '74,4„;,,i..--_:-,. ,.. ,v,c,,,...,,, A.,:. ;..,.. . '.
,_ t
A' . Vit`
.02eC
"*n
-Ca ,�'It-'-`;';':"'-''''''‘ ems,-"`•' e.� r
Facing North
a
a' r g '...1' +1,y,,',S'' .,„ ,
rl s ' 7-
t
'1k, 4 , s « ._.I .c r \ .; I
'-,' v ,„ ,. i3,:i-c.'.::-,--,..-4:.-- = - ..., l'X''',,'r.4,17„.4 ,
„
+' « *�-p' .
Difio
lw ti
Y
.ice mir,,,"'. - :., •1 -� \- 1 1 I
•
P r
•
:r"Malikv ,y • [ a..,7-.0:'al •{., •\' ' .R��'•.N. ? . . 1°�1
ti. ���p����a f
` Y y `
F 1' � ,
j n 4R1`s -x
t
,..,,..,::, ,... .. .,,,..:,. . ,,..... ,,. ,.: . ....,;:: ,,,,,„..,. ..,,,J-:„. 4,1*c';','-,'''' ''''Q..„-,,,?4-,474 -,,,,„,.. 1
!
•
,
A'Y-NN 4
A 1,. -t
6
t, �� I .'",-•'=•".Ni' ' 4. 1 r 9 111
{ j. : {•„"
P
-1'
r '+{ ' b A .. ,,Y S Ta{sr ,,,:',-,:i3....45. .,. A r, ..s: .',",,,711, .i....• ,a . c %..w " V• ,.1 • -4 �
,.-,,,it.........,,,,,A.,,:...
R, \ _ .l al 1"
„4.
{'.-",,di-
f . .
,...„...k. n.,'•' r•
`.11 ,{ 4 ..1. • �1('
gr} Y aq�, 5 ,"1 )) j 1 . 9 ��{r,ti,, y
Y 1 �l Ott rh- , ! {q.` S `.t
PC
// °� Exhibit B -1
.
#17-3945
q vel t_
1 , `14 2701 Pence
� 14
' rte'� M - YY '�y
' V
44'
4t
i"illi
oi. ,.. .c-,
Ft r
r * c as
., Pence Lane & Walters
Port
z- i Ili . .. s.
t
sy ;., •---;L:,... 4
, ,. .,,,,„
a ,t
� 2710Pence
r
2709 ,,, '
Walters
Port
.' s1
F
• 1110'011
i,
"` ri
, r.....0„
i
,a •
2715 Pence
}
PC
Exhibit I
2703 Walters Port l..n. #17-3945
Orono,MN,55331
June 18,2017
Orono Planning Commission
Orono.MN
#17-3945
to all concerned:
I would like to know what will happen to the shed across from my home.
My suggestion would be to demolish it. When it was built I wrote a letter
disputing its placement. I would love a lovely home out my front window.
but not a shed. The 2nd owner not only had his service people use the
shed,but they parked their rustic cars for the day also. The latest owners
have let the greenery grow over the shed and happily we cannot see it,yet
come winter it is visible. Owners of lovely homes do not want a shed out-
side their window,but they don't seem to mind if it's outside a neighbor's
window.
The Dunkley's have been nice neighbors,and they like nice surroundings.
I doubt if they would cause the shed to be a problem for us,and perhaps
they are not aware of how much it has been a problem to us through the
years. Since they will own our road, it becomes an important problem
once again as they would have access to the shed from Walter's Port.
(I had always wished Pence&Walters Port could become one,and use
the gated road together.)
I wish Sue and Bill well, but please get rid of the shed.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Reese-Marton