The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About#6712-variance-2016 , � c'j,�D �, �-e �/�Gt� , , r,; , �; ,, t � Doc No T05420757 � Certified, filed and/or recorded on Feb 1, 2017 4:30 PM Office of the Registrar of Tities Hennepin County, Minnesota Martin McCormick, Registrar of Titles Mark Chapin, County Auditor and Treasurer Deputy 30 Pkg ID 1509430M Document Recording Fee $46.00 Multiple Certificates Affected Fee $120.00 Document Tofa/ $166.00 Existing C;erts 1417749, 1422026, 1413377, 1419016, 1413379, 1434371, 1432516 This cover sheet is now a permanent part of the recorded document. „ � � 1`t l 1 ( �f � , ` ' � �taao�� ., ` ) y 1 33�77 , �"��o ) W Lf 3 3 7`�' CITY OF ORONO � � � u 3 1 ( RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 'y G�'�` � y2 `2. r � � T10. � 7 � � � j'�kESHo�`�. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ORONO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE , SECTIONS 78-128 AND 78-1279(� FOR LOTS 1,2,3,4,5, 6,AND 7,BLOCK 1, MOONEY LAKE PRESERVE ' —FILE N0. 16-3877 WI#EREAS, George W. Stickney (hereinafter the "Applicant”) on behalf of the owners ofLots 1,2,3,4,5,6,and 7,Block 1,MOONEY LAKE PRESERVE(hereinafterthe"Lots") on October 7,2016 made an application to the City for variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279(6) in order to a11ow a new home on each Lot to be constructed lakeward of the defined average lakeshore setback line where no such encroachment is normally allowed; and a variance to Section 78-128 to allow said variances to be applicable on a permanent basis rather than subject to the standard 1-year expiration if not used; and WHEREAS,on November 21,2016 after published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City Code,the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, on Novexnber 21, 2016, the Planning Commission on a vote of 6-0 recommended conditional approval of the variances; and WHEREAS,on December 12,2016,the City Council reviewed the application and the recommendations of the Planning Commission and City staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby approves thc requested variances as described above based on one or more.of the following findings of fact concerning this property: FINDINGS OF FACT: A1. The analysis contained within staff inemos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the above mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed�t these meetings are hereby incorporated by reference. A2. The Lots a�e located within the RR-1B Single Family Rural Residential District which requires a m�inimum lot area of 2.0 acres and a minimum lot width of 200' for construction of a single�mily residence. �� , �°�o CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CI'TY COUNCIL y 2 �l �� ! NO. p � � 'ikE5H04�' A3. Each of the Lots abuts Mooney Lake. The Lots are each in excess of 2.0 acres in area, and each meets the minimum required lot width at the OHWL of Mooney Lake as well as at the 100' lal�eshore setback line. As of the adoption of this resolution, all of the seven Lots are vacant. A4. The Lots are located within Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier 1 which allows 25% hardcover. A5. The Appli�t is the developer of MOONEY LAKE PRESERVE and as of the date of this Resolution as sold 5 of the 7lakeshore Lots and retained ownershi�of 2 Lots. A6. In the original subdivision application for MOONEY LAKE PRESERVE, possible house pads,and in some cases expected house locations,were depicted in order to show that each proposed Lot had a suitable conforming building site. On some Lots the depicted locations were the only feasible location for a home based on topography, tree preservation, wetlands, stormwater ponding, septic sites, driveway locations, or a combination of these site factors. A7. The plat of MOONEY LAKE PRESERVE was approved without a reference to the potential impacts of the Average Lakeshore Setback ordinance (the "Ordinance"), Orono Zoning Code Section 78-1279(6) which is predicated on the relationships of home locations on the immediately adjacent lots. The intent of the average lakeshore setback rules is pre�servation of lake views enjoyed by adjacent properties. Absent provisions to address the average lakeshore setback,depending on which lot is built on first,the average setback rule could force a variance situation for one or more of these newly platted Lots. As a result, it was recommended by City staff that the developer apply for a `blanket' average lakeshore setback variance on behalf of the owners of the seven lakeshore Lots. A8. Under the ordinance as currently written, administration of the average lakeshore setback is cornpletely reliant on the location of the existing homes on the two adjacent lakeshore lots. Whe� there is no home on one of the adjacent lakeshore lots, the required average setback is defined as the setback from the lake of the home on the opposite adjacent lot. When neither adjacent lot contains a home, the average setback is undefined, and the applicant's home may be placed at the required lake setback for that zone. A9. As documented in the staff report to the Planning Commission dated November 15, 2016, the impacts of the provisions of the Ordinance vary from Lot to Lot, and are a function of the unpred ctable timing and individual location of new home construction. As a result, absent a pr vision to exempt the Lots from the Ordinance,the buildability of a specific Lot may be red ced or even nullified by actions of an adjacent property owner. Such potential impairmen�s are not in the best interest of the City or the Lot owners. , ��o CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF TI-iE CITY COUNCIL � � 712 �� No. G l'�kESHo�`�' A10. The solutfon to avoid the need for individual variances resulting from the timing and location of f each successive house construction is to grant a blanket variance, establishing condition� of approval that will ensure an appropriate review process in the event of a potential�iew encroachment. Subject to appropriate conditions,the granting of an average lakeshore�setback variance for each of the Lots will meet the intent and spirit of the Ordinance while avoiding the need for individual Lot owners to apply for a variance for a newly platted Lot. A11. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and recomme�dation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variances 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. VARIANCE ANALYSIS: According to MN §462.537 Subd. 6(2) variances sha11 only be petmitted when the following standards are satisfied(findings applicable to a117 Lots are in bold text): B 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. Single family hoqies and the associated amenities are permitted uses in the RR-1B district The average lajkeshore setback ordinance is intended to protect neighboring properties' views of tlijje lake. Granting of the variances with conditions will maintain those views. B2. The varianice is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Granting of the variance with conditions',will be consistent with the intent of the comprehensive plan to protect lake views. B3. The applic�nt establishes that there are practical difficulties: a. The proper�y owners propose to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official cor�trols. The Lot owners are proposing to use t6eir properties in a reasonable manner by�constructing new homes in a configuration wLich while not strictly meeting the provisipns of the ordinance will effectively meet the intent of the ordinance. b. There are cfrcumstances unique to the properties not created by the landowners. The varied topogaphy, requirements for tree preservation, and the location of wetlands, stormwate� ponds, septic sites, and driveways are unique factors to tlus subdivision wluch resu�lt in the limited possibilities for placement of homes within each Lo� None of these fadtors were created by the Lot owners. r � � ��o CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ��j' ��` rro. � 7 � 2 'YBS H o4� c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The character of the neighborhood is not likely to be significantly altered by the granting of the average setback variances. The large lot sizes, established setbacks between homes, and anticipate�d house locations based on individual site factors will tend to create the desired neighborhood character rather than alter it. B4. Economic�considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter. Econamic considerations have not been a fac�or in the variance approval determination.The proposed home locations are related to individual site factors and not to economic factors. B5. 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. B6. The board or the council may not pennit as a variance any use that is not peimitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. Tbis condition is not applicable,as the use for single family homes is an allowed use in the RR-1B Distric� B7. 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. City Code 78-123 p�rovides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: B8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question aze peculiaz to such property or immediately adjoining property. The average lakeshore setback ordinance is applicable�'or all existing lakeshore lots in Orono. However,new lakeshore subdivisions that create multiple single family lots are not common in Orono, as a majority of the City's lakeshore has long been developed. Strict application of the ordinance, which relies on the locations of e�sting homes in relation to new proposed homes, has the potential to be inconsistent and result in unintended outcomes due to the timing of construction on adjacent lots. B9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is loca�ed. The standards applicable to these Lots apply to all other lakeshore property in the RR 1B District. However, when strictly applied to new lakeshore subdivision�, the ordinance can result in inappropriate home locations which can be avoided by�he granting of variances when specific conditions are included. B 10. The grantin�of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Granting of the average lakeshore setback variances with conditions vYill result in appropriately located homes so that the intent of the ordinance, preservation of lake views enjoyed by adjacent lots,is preserved. �°�o CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL y� �� NO. � 7 � Z t�kE5N�4� B11. The granting of the proposed variances 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 of the requested variances would not impair health,safety,comfort or morals and would be in keeping with the intent of the zoning code. B 12. The granting of such variances will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant,but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. In the opinion of staff, granting of the � average lakeshore setback v�riances is necessary to solve an obvious practical difficulty created by strict application of the ordinance to a new lakeshore subdivision where the placement of a home and timing of construction on any given Lot affects the potential allowable locations for homes on adjacent Lots. In a situation where the location of the first home to be constructed can negatively affect the possible conforming locations for adjacent homes constructed later, granting of variances to the ordinance is an appropriate remedy to alleviate the practical difficulty. CONCLUSIONS, ORD.ER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279(6) in order to allow a new home on each of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, MOONEY LAKE PRESERVE to be constructed lakeward of the definEd average lakeshore setback line where no such encroachment is normally allowed, and a variance to Section 78-128 to allow said variances to be applicable on a permanent basis rather than subj�ct to the standard 1-year expiration if not used; subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed or possible home site location depictions for Lots 1 through 7, Block 1, MOONEY LAKE PRESERVE as shown on the drawings (attached hereto as Ezhibit A), which were established during final plat approval are approved for principal residence construction in the locations depicted. Any substantial relocation of homes or accessory str�ctures lakewazd of said depictions which in the opinion of the Orono Planning Department might impair lake views of one or more adjacent lakeshore Lots shall require an average lakeshore setback review by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Owners,but aze pernussive only. T'he variances granted herein and the conditions imposed are intended to remain valid for construction of the initial principal residence structure on each lot, and do not expire. Future replacement or reconstruction of the initial principal residence structure on a Lot sha11 be subject to these same conditions. �'Q�o CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL y� �� NO. � 7 �I 2 t'�k�sHo� 3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4. The terms of this resolution shall be considered as a supplement to the approvals granted in Final Plat Approval Resolution No. 6548 and to the Mooney Lake Preserve Development Contract, both documents on file in the office of the City Clerk. This resolution shall be recorded with Hennepin County for each of Lots 1 through 7. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 12th day of December, 2016. ATTEST: ,�-� �� , � c � fr��6JC.� ''� iane Tiegs, City Cle�� Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor 4 • 1 • � ' � ��./..�NI�,4� � : .,� � � ��Ti�T�f�ANI�!///NA`!I�iR' ,I3�-'.' ''�- .��i�*��''�`�i��`yr.•r _ ��,,��,,,��, /�'=.�; ��i,, �� - � y ��. ,`� ;,'�� , �- � .� , ��`� � �.,.�- x � � •ir-�� 4� �,u�k'��`�R! �,.� `'� �'�; ,�".'�,`� ,'�'',y�it;,_,,,�;f� - , ;,�_� �-y+`�cr��' ,.�. 1 ',MIY��-, f',��, z+��'�to ��' �_1� �: ti�'� ;a�!� ��+� � ?'�a��/,��j,��% _ :� ;��{� .. ..l-r,� t� t J� »i--J . ..l'/ .,�. � -��"'�`' ---vr... ��^1�'�'�`:�.r1�y}� � �.��'�I!/iJ,r-:�= �iiY�.1�C;l�//;' � ��.�wnr ar�r• -s xr_�r��;u:�.•�� !;;. � ..�.��i "-�"��, � �*/ �/ �� •'I��'�, � ,�� 1 �1��`'�I ,�f�l�. ,�: ' . l�. � I � !�1 1 � .l_ �/ �'j � ��-' /�i�I`��'`�� r r ► i t��^� �.wy� � ��/'i,�' r y �`/.w; '!� �,��/,�� Yi► �„�,��1��'��s,r.�;/y;�♦ � ��, � .,�, J-�ir�'c.` �'�^ -3t�.�l�i� �'� ,� �,! % � • ► '��r �-.�.-,��.il��:.:.,�`�`.�- , ;,.�� ;, � •. +��• '�_ ::i�" �'��'=" ��-��A��i, J� '�'`� is� i�MII�'�'__T■'L'f`.jJ�si/�'�'� �F • � �.. Cjt ' ��.-�,-I. , y, �-'r � r��.r.vl.l� "'� _�_ ;j : ,,�� ;,�i;�'�� ? •r_:::.�.�r,..�I�� .r /r ��; j.r� ;,'�. �.,�-'� ♦ . �(��'� ♦'�l�`_'L !�� / � � f .7: . 1 '�4��:��:'i''�' — � r-+�_ �- r.. . .� �� s'_'1�� :�� - / ( . � - - r- t�� '� . - .�•, . � _ . _- r�� •� ,'.��I��r_. l t ^�i _ �� 1��`� i 1 t ��+:� �- I ° �\` `� � .�1 h'i7.: �� t 'I� -�I � ^ '�C��Yr��•` •1 �� "C��.' � w� A r� 1 111� ��,��; _ � � '��1��' . ��r: � � �� 'J� �♦ � .��►`; rr�ir,�� ` �� w � `:J�/ j lrl� r�� r,� ��•, 'n �'��,,� - . .� ,�,��` ��, �♦�r� �� J► '�� ... �r�,� r � %� �• �11�l�� •� �y-� 4:.�. � _ �`� _ - __ '�� j � �. '�� '� �` � �= ��=f��l� : f�� . _ �: ,%� ., �_ �, ��j �� e - - .�. � ,�� ,, . ;�s �� II � ``� .t�'= -,_•-�., _{- � �J'� `,,r -�- � � � �, - ._ ��F � r � �� , , . � � , �� ,� ��.� �� _�,l,I . �� y r[.y i�� ..�� _ ` ?�, c ,�?� �� `�� ,��; � :� . . �� .�,� .� � , ; �� '*�j�y�,l1 ''� t •�`.� �'I! � � ��A, - '" �� '� c ��..,�-�s �+ ` F.y...:.�_._.,T.�� • . �•_ - . .-,� , � . , i STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The undersigned,being duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Orono, Minnesota, ce�rtifies that I compared the foregoing was adopted at the meeting of the Orono City Council on December 12, 2016, with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same is a correct transcription thereof. `��''a=�= _s:� ��: , , �::��;.:.�,r '�� WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the. : �. �i this 15�'day of December, 2016. ,,,��.�� ae_.,I .�t��` Ty .� �..��., � I sp� � �. . . p�.-�'r '/��li..s� �; � . �.P\�. . �..J� OQ M :A+.•` � Fs I A � e Tie�,�t f�l y:�"��j' e c.► ;:- . ♦ � i . ,. . ;/� �P�:� �°sY�"{(. .i i � �� a r-,,\, �•ii�� :.'o �.r . ��'!j� c i�d�j�, � � �., + \'; �.�'`�/�a+ �'li�i��. .: �r� g �dmos�a•'�� *p(� � +�� 'l�-+`e• 1at._,��[R:.i.:��,.. _