The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About#4486 - Amendment to #4416 /�O � �� O O � b` - � C ITY of ORONO � � , �'',� G�%% RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL L�S_H� rvo. 4 � � � A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO VARIANCES PER CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION NO. 4416 FILE NO. 2557 WHEREAS, Daniel J. McAthie and Judith K. McAthie, husband and wife, (hereinafter"the applicants")are owners of the property located at 1449 Bay Ridge Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Tracts C and P, Rebistered Land Survey No. 192, Subject to easement for County Road 15, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 19, 2000, at ��hich time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and �'�'HEREAS,the City Council adopted Resolution No.4416 approving variances to permit a second story addition and garage addition to the existing residence. 1\TOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS l. This application was reviewed as Zoning File �2�57. 2. This properiy is located in the LR-lA Zoning District, where 2 acres or 87,120 s.f. is the minimum lot area. The property consists of approximately .98 acres or 42,784 s.f. ;. The City Council approved variances to permit a second story addition to the existing house and alteration of the foundation to reconstruct the garage. 4. On May 15, 2000 the City of Orono issued a Building Permit to permit construction of the addition based on the variance approvals granted by the Council. 5. The variance approval was based on the fact the existing residence would remain on the property and the addition would be placed above. Page 1 of 3 � Q—� /� � � � .� _ �� CITY of ORONO a �� ti RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL �L9kES1304�G N0. 1.� �"r R � . � During an inspection of the area, Staff had observed the entire residence had been removed, except the foundation had remained. As a result, the City of Orono had placed a hold on the Buildin� Permit to review the variances. 7. The foundation remains and is located over 1�0' from the lakeshore across County Road 15. The building being located into the average lakeshore setback may not be an issue as most houses in the locality are located across County Road 15 and on a hill. 8. After beginning the project, the contractor, Michael Hayes Homes, determined a small portion of the foundation on the back of the house �vould need to be replaced because it was cracked. Also, some of the joists ��ere rotten requiring the entire � house to be removed,eYcept the foundation. The contractor had also noted it was not possible to identify rotted joists or structural problems prior to the removal of some of the house. Those areas were not visible to an inspector hired by the property owners. 9. The house is located outside of the 7�' lakeshore setback and across a County road. The City has reviewed the impact of the house on the shoreland area and has determined there would not be a greater impact to the shoreland area than the preexistin� house. The house would be built entirely w-ithin the foundation. 10. The contractor would use the foundation and will not increase the building beyond the footprint previously approved. Only a portion of the foundation that was located under the east side of the house would be fully replaced, this being done to comply w�ith the State Building Code requirements. Mr. Hay-es has stated he guarantees the construction and to guarantee the building he must meet the requirements of the State Building Code. 11. The house would be constructed to the specifications revie�t�ed on January 19,2000 at the Public Hearing �vith the Planning Commission, and at the time of variance approval. No cilanges to the exterior of the structure are proposed. 12. The Council finds the contractor should be permitted to continue as the proposed construction is in keeping with the intent of the variance approvals granted per Resolution No. 4166. The construction of the house is located beyond the 7�' lakeshore setback, and would not further impact the lake. Paje 2 of 3 � %� �� 0� O O � CITY of ORONO � 6' ' � �'� �'� � RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL �9 44'/ N O. � � � � �S� - CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby permits the City of Orono to release the Building Permit issued May 1�, 2000, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants with Zoning Application#2557. Any amendments to the site plan may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of the variances shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Adopted by the City Council of the City or Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of June, 2000. ATTEST: � �, ',��i�-' � Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabri Jabbour, Mayo STATE OF � i ESOTA ) ) ss. COUIvTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 26th day of June, 2000 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S.Vee,Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono,a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. ��^l / ' ,�L�,. L��'-'�i�.¢'!''�- � .,' - MARY AivN JOHNSON � >'.;�. � NOTARYPUBUC-MINNESQTA Notary P'ublic � �,� �� A�r CarrNs,tion Eupkes Jan.31,2005 �'t Page 3 of 3