Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Monday,July 13,2020 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Mr. Nygard said everyone could see by looking that he moved the property line to two feet off the <br /> boathouse because that is what the Planning Commission wanted. He also decided to adjust it to where <br /> the crest of the hill is. It is a fairly steep hill and would be next to impossible to maintain from above, so a <br /> large part of it would have to be trespassed on in order to maintain it. There is also a waterfall in the front <br /> part that's over the property line that has been there for 18 years. The property line change would make <br /> that area part of 1386. The time period for adverse possession is 15 years in Minnesota. The hardcover is <br /> lowered for both properties; the hardcover stays the same for 1386, but adjusting the line gives it more <br /> hardcover so it drops from 27.5%to 26.2%. The hardcover for 1380 is down from 4,819 to 4,549, <br /> dropping it from 29%to 28.2%. Another issue is the side yard setback to the shed and boathouse. Both <br /> have been approved by Councils in their current location so they are legally non-conforming structures. <br /> He has been able to remove the shed from the side yard setback issue; it is now outside of 7 '/2 feet so the <br /> shed, as far as side yard setback is concerned, is legal. He is gaining 3.92 feet along a 23-foot stretch by <br /> the boathouse that is going to reduce that setback. It is a win-win for everyone. The hardcover drops on <br /> both lots; one non-conformity is removed, although another is increased a little bit. He has tried to make <br /> the best out of the situation and solve problems for anyone who will own the two properties. <br /> Crosby noted, looking at page 2, the proposed percentage changes are a little different compared to what <br /> Mr. Nygard mentioned. For 1386, the proposed hardcover is 25.91%; for 1380, it is 28.43%. <br /> Mr. Nygard stated the numbers in the report are not accurate. He said he was not going to get a survey for <br /> what he was doing on the property because he did not have to until he decided he wanted to make <br /> additional changes. By the time he got the survey, he had removed the illegal hardcover. The survey that <br /> was submitted did not include the 270 square feet of hardcover that he removed from the property. He put <br /> together another document showing the actual hardcover numbers before and after. He stated he is a <br /> mechanical engineer and does this kind of work and is confident his numbers are accurate. <br /> Crosby said he wished Mr. Nygard had shared it with the City first. <br /> Mr. Nygard said he shared it several times. <br /> Barnhart stated the numbers on the second page of the memo were developed from the hardcover <br /> calculations in the survey provided by the surveyor as part of the original application. The original survey <br /> and hardcover calculations did not include the fence posts and other improvements shown. <br /> Crosby asked Mr. Nygard if he agreed with Barnhart's statement. <br /> Mr. Nygard said he agreed that the numbers came from the survey which did not include the illegal <br /> hardcover he had already removed. <br /> Barnhart clarified that the hardcover was already removed so it was not included in the survey. <br /> Crosby asked if the 25.91%and 28.43%numbers were accurate. <br /> Barnhart said those numbers reflect the hardcover calculations in the survey as it exists today. <br /> Mr.Nygard stated the other numbers are from the date he bought the property to today and the survey was <br /> taken after he removed some hardcover. In order for him to get the driveway done last year, he had to pull <br /> it out before the ground froze. He had City water coming into the driveway and had to solve that problem <br /> Page 7 of 19 <br />