HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution #6942 •
Doc No T05595279
Certified, filed and/or recorded on
Feb 19, 2019 8:05 AM
Office of the Registrar of Titles
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Martin McCormick, Registrar of Titles
Mark Chapin, County Auditor and Treasurer
Deputy 87 Pkg ID 1791963E
Document Recording Fee $46.00
Document Total $46.00
Existing Certs
1390279
\ OAtp CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 694 2
`.„XESH0°'
A RESOLUTION
APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM
MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 78-1405 a.(8)b.1
FILE NO. LA18-000087
WHEREAS, on October 17, 2019, Robert Brook, Property Owner ("Applicant"),
applied for a variance from the City Code for the property addressed 1165 Ferndale Road W and
legally described in Exhibit A (hereinafter the"Property");
WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a
variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1405 a.(8)b to allow a six foot privacy fence
where a 42 inch fence is allowed; and
WHEREAS, on January 22, 2019, after published and mailed notice in accordance
with Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the 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 January 22, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended
[approval/denial] of the variance; and
WHEREAS,on February 11, 2019,the City Council reviewed the application and
the recommendations of the Planning Commission and City staff; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono,
Minnesota hereby [approves/denies] the requested variance as described above based on one or
more of the following findings of fact concerning the Property:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #LA18-000087. The analysis contained
within staff memos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the
above mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings
are hereby incorporated by reference.
2. The Property is located in the LR-1A Zoning District.
1
‘1.OAtp CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
•A Gam* NO. 6942
t�kEsHO
3. The Property contains 4.65 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 120 feet.
4. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25 %according to the Stormwater
Quality Overlay District.
5. Applicant has applied for the following variance:
To allow a 6 foot tall fence to be locate din the street yard,not adjacent to a County
or State Highway.
6. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and
recommendation of the Planning Commission and 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.
ANALYSIS:
1. "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of the ordinance . . . ." The City determines that the 6 foot tall fence in the
street yard is in harmony with the intent of the Ordinance which is to balance the
privacy needs of property owners on busy streets with the desire to preserve a natural
streetscape environment in residential neighborhoods.
2. "Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the
comprehensive plan." An addition of a fence to a property with an existing home is
consistent with the comprehensive plan.
3. "Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are
practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. `Practical difficulties,' as used
in connection with the granting of a variance,means that:
a. The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner,
however, the proposed use is not permitted by the official controls.
The use of a fence is a reasonable accessory use within the LR-1A District.
b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created
by the landowner.
2
*(4 CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 694 2
The applicant states the section of Ferndale is busy and acts like a county road
and so,should follow the city code exception to allow for a 6 foot fence.
c. The variance, ifgranted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. "
A fence should not alter the character of the area.
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 fence is an allowed accessory
use in the LR-1A District.
7. "The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling
as a two-family dwelling."This condition is not applicable.
8. "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such
property or immediately adjoining property."The property is bisected by a road the serves
downtown Wayzata. Due to the unique shape and configuration of the lot, the home is
located near this road, creating the need for separation and privacy.
9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the
land is located."The applicant finds this to be true due to the position of the home to
the right of way creating the need separation.
10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant."The applicant has stated this to be true, the
City concurs.
3
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 6942
l�'FES HG��
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." The applicant has
stated this to be true,the City concurs.
12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant,but is
necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty." The applicant has stated this to be true,
the City concurs.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS:
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a
variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section(78-1405 a.(8)b.1.) to allow a 6 foot fence
where a 42 inch high fence is permitted, subject to the following conditions:
1. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings.
2. The approved project shall conform to the site plan survey dated October 10, 2018
submitted by the Applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as
Exhibit B.
3. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require
further Planning Commission and City Council review.
4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicants, but
are permissive only and must be exercised by completing the work within one year of the
date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (February 11, 2020).
5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution may
result in the termination of any authority granted herein.
ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this 11th day of February, 2019.
ATTEST: / CIT OF I RONO:
jz-2,7,---y-A(2 4 %Wi,
•
Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor
4
�Op CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 694 2
G
t�''�E5HG�0
Exhibit A
DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
Parcel 1:
Tract B, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 522, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Parcel2:
Lots 2 and 8
And
That part of the abandoned County Road adjoining Lots 2 and 8, and that part of the
abandoned undesignated street adjoining the Westerly line of Lot 2, all described as beginning at
the most Northerly corner of Lot 8; thence Westerly along the Northerly line of Lot 8 to the
Easterly line of Tract B,REGIS I BRED LAND SURVEY NO.522,Files of the Registrar of Titles,
County of Hennepin; thence Northerly along the Easterly line of said Tract B to the Northeasterly
comer of said Tract B; thence Southeasterly, deflecting to the right 120 degrees 17 minutes to the
Westerly line of Lot 2,thence Southerly along said Westerly line to the most Southwesterly corner
of Lot 2; thence Easterly along the Southerly line of Lot 2 to its intersection with the extension
Northwesterly of the Northeasterly line of Lot 8; thence Southeasterly along said extension to the
point of beginning.
All in NORTH SHORE COTTAGE ACRES LAKE MINNETONKA.
5
z
r ,C‘l r8 � dX h� a NLV'ON0110 1S3M4VO113'1VQN1I33S911 401 ; Q
ji
..,
Itliii
a.
nSO ,'> .' t';� llf 1 wH
v
X m a -`" 3 g1' o f )NaaIS]2I NNIE10�I002Ia Midi i :',I II i W
W r w
g �� 6 ,.... ED, ,
\ J,„ ` __,, v‹,,,-----,--
.,...,
`7�/_ ,L ` W
t, . ,.,
, V' --, I
/ •
/ m • Lid.,
w lS, /
, k, , p01' /
.(,'S, 4.,. -it. _,
..)T., 41,111004-o- ,- --. ',,:,-i •., /
. .../ ..
/ ' i V -- .
,.
,..
___,..,_
„,
,/
, ,
1
„ •„
( b_
�' i I
1'!'. �iGC'PP� Ilt 1 jOr Ii W ./
7Mn, 'V..
',it,
N
,)410 4 a'\ 9ill API:fR....1 Li-
W
3 , '',• \ wa..,
o� >7
'[
111111111*
'''C\\ <\ \ c Z
I 16 2� �s ;\ fl,
/off Q1?� fti� �d6 \ oorj FE 0_
I W �6 \ \ , \\ //° 6 Fj•
W •
Si
to 41 M
.� ''z ( I lii
a i i i 1
+-----' - = :I €'- -_-.,:.J-=---3---
Y 1 f
I i-
Q
._ i { —I W
n
...-.m
w
U
7_
_.m_.9 ,
0
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The undersigned, being duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of
Orono, Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at the
meeting of the Orono City Council on February 11, 2019 with the original thereof on file
in my office, and the same is a correct transcription thereof
WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the
City this 12th day of February, 2019.
Anna Carlson, City Clerk
(seal)
svOkp CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
-1 *4" NO. 6942
G
I'kESHos'
A RESOLUTION
APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM
MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 78-1405 a.(8)b.1
FILE NO.LA18-000087
WHEREAS, on October 17, 2019, Robert Brook, Property Owner ("Applicant"),
applied for a variance from the City Code for the property addressed 1165 Ferndale Road W and
legally described in Exhibit A (hereinafter the"Property");
WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a
variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1405 a.(8)b to allow a six foot privacy fence
where a 42 inch fence is allowed; and
WHEREAS, on January 22, 2019, after published and mailed notice in accordance
with Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the 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 January 22, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended
[approval/denial] of the variance; and
WHEREAS, on February 11, 2019,the City Council reviewed the application and
the recommendations of the Planning Commission and City staff; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono,
Minnesota hereby [approves/denies] the requested variance as described above based on one or
more of the following findings of fact concerning the Property:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #LA18-000087. The analysis contained
within staff memos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the
above mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings
are hereby incorporated by reference.
2. The Property is located in the LR-1A Zoning District.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 6942
t�kESH�4�
3. The Property contains 4.65 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 120 feet.
4. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25 %according to the Stormwater
Quality Overlay District.
5. Applicant has applied for the following variance:
To allow a 6 foot tall fence to be locate din the street yard, not adjacent to a County
or State Highway.
6. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and
recommendation of the Planning Commission and 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.
ANALYSIS:
1. "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of the ordinance . . . ." The City determines that the 6 foot tall fence in the
street yard is in harmony with the intent of the Ordinance which is to balance the
privacy needs of property owners on busy streets with the desire to preserve a natural
streetscape environment in residential neighborhoods.
2. "Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the
comprehensive plan." An addition of a fence to a property with an existing home is
consistent with the comprehensive plan.
3. "Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are
practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. `Practical difficulties,' as used
in connection with the granting of a variance,means that:
a. The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner,
however, the proposed use is not permitted by the official controls.
The use of a fence is a reasonable accessory use within the LR-1A District.
b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created
by the landowner.
2
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 694 2
•AESHOv-t
The applicant states the section of Ferndale is busy and acts like a county road
and so,should follow the city code exception to allow for a 6 foot fence.
c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality."
A fence should not alter the character of the area.
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 fence is an allowed accessory
use in the LR-1A District.
7. "The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling
as a two-family dwelling."This condition is not applicable.
8. "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such
property or immediately adjoining property." The property is bisected by a road the serves
downtown Wayzata. Due to the unique shape and configuration of the lot, the home is
located near this road, creating the need for separation and privacy.
9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the
land is located." The applicant finds this to be true due to the position of the home to
the right of way creating the need separation.
10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant." The applicant has stated this to be true, the
City concurs.
3
•
sLOAtp CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 6 9 4 2
9kESHO'
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." The applicant has
stated this to be true,the City concurs.
12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is
necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty." The applicant has stated this to be true,
the City concurs.
CONCLUSIONS,ORDER AND CONDITIONS:
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a
variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section (78-1405 a.(8)b.1.) to allow a 6 foot fence
where a 42 inch high fence is permitted, subject to the following conditions:
1. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings.
2. The approved project shall conform to the site plan survey dated October 10, 2018
submitted by the Applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as
Exhibit B.
3. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require
further Planning Commission and City Council review.
4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicants, but
are permissive only and must be exercised by completing the work within one year of the
date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (February 11, 2020).
5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution may
result in the termination of any authority granted herein.
ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this 11th day of February, 2019.
ATTEST: / CIT OF S RONO:
4
'.f 40.
e
Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor
4
OO4 CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
� G�� NO. 694 2
t�kESHo v
Exhibit A
DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
Parcel 1:
Tract B, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 522,Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Parcell:
Lots 2 and 8
And
That part of the abandoned County Road adjoining Lots 2 and 8, and that part of the
abandoned undesignated street adjoining the Westerly line of Lot 2, all described as beginning at
the most Northerly corner of Lot 8; thence Westerly along the Northerly line of Lot 8 to the
Easterly line of Tract B,REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO.522,Files of the Registrar of Titles,
County of Hennepin; thence Northerly along the Easterly line of said Tract B to the Northeasterly
corner of said Tract B; thence Southeasterly, deflecting to the right 120 degrees 17 minutes to the
Westerly line of Lot 2,thence Southerly along said Westerly line to the most Southwesterly corner
of Lot 2; thence Easterly along the Southerly line of Lot 2 to its intersection with the extension
Northwesterly of the Northeasterly line of Lot 8; thence Southeasterly along said extension to the
point of beginning.
All in NORTH SHORE COTTAGE ACRES LAKE MINNETONKA.
5
6942
Exhibit C
LA18-000087
CJ \� fi
�y < \ / PC
FoTDTO FROeTb'-�'(Cq¢IR`I/� rotlpl \ < /
,////,WOODIX CG.IfN 'o1 M - , •
\\� 6'..t4
Z.POST TREATED ! ./.ENCE o �� , --y� / '
t 1 �pV •
we /
• SVEIVE[\!
jr\
\ ei eCouuReeLLeITeNDF u e
\-1,C% 4----a. 4 „. .�.� f,ADPe'6Enr1 ! r \ /
1.'4er keenen 6 S.'ekes,Int.
cmAR VP / V;, \\\ \ M1.%46:;, / .mu nMssm°sl«
LAYER j •,' •b\` e n•en creel
ORIX6 CEDAR / \ ,//
ACK FETAL CAP FOR PRIVACY 1 / // \ + ``/s` oe p
///�/-°OO�LL r
e—r +eolum a°VCDtTE oorn+ee' WTM / / .\' �� + \ ,, t.rw.,n.a.•IJremne
J IA910EeeaRr '.:/ ._._ / �r.�ib7.4,1•: . �\, �� \ J\� l
1011111L.: '11111
c T+ 'f' WW
--- - - I,! �/ cg coq �F or!
\O
4 o i iii ti j SS •\ -441111/411/160006 \�
/ \ EXISTING . .. _ l,, x
Agi
1 �I V ASPHALTS E T•• BE / ��� C
H 1t i1 �r Ja G p\R\IVEWAY est 7L -TAKED --1orc
Rgss \ 1"411 �� •i., \ \ •FENCE \ I.
o
'1) \ \ ..k_ ... iiiiidiallOr
•
, \'-‘ ailigifir
FENCE T DE PAINTED \ W
151-ADD "7
e 1 3�� 5'4 CaQ
OFENCE DETAILcp ( a/ N
5CALE.,.r-0e \ CI G RAGE FENCE��c': ,� Qa ^
RESID CE — i •` '� ,
......
00_____
o _ ` / P�_�+
-\`\r . H r \ 4 • �.......`.
O PLAN ED Sala Iner
BCALE:j'•1'-00' ar«Kaa
O wns: „
Ann L14141!
revisions
FENCE PLANS
iimimit
1
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The undersigned, being duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of
Orono, Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at the
meeting of the Orono City Council on February 11, 2019 with the original thereof on file
in my office, and the same is a correct transcription thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the
City this 12th day of February, 2019.
Anna Carlson, City Clerk
(seal)