HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes/notes re lot �
J . �
City of Orono
7 : 00 P.M.
Regul�r Meeting of the Ororio Council , D�cember 3(� , 19� 2
The Orono Council r,i�t on the above date with the
� following m�mbers present : Mayor Van Nest ,
� Councilmember eut.ler , Councilnember Adams , and
Councilmember Hurr . Absent : Councilmember
�' Frahm . Also present : City Attorney Malkerson�
I�
;+ J . Diann Goetten� of the Planning Commission , John
`,� Ham.mere? of the Planninq Commission , Charles
Kelly of the Planning Commission , George Rovegno
; of the Planning Comnission , Ed Callahan of the
Planning Commission and Mr . Bill Sime newly
; apoointed Planning Commission member , City
i Planner Alan Olson , anc� Deputy City Clerk Sandi
i Woytcke .
� CONSENT AGENDA*
i
Councilmember Butl.er mov�d , Councilmember Hurr
seconded , to approve the Consent Agenda* as
presented . Motion , Ayes ( 4) - Nays ((�) .
PUBLIC HEARING - LAKE MINNETONRA ISLAND ORDINANCE '
Mayor Van Nest opened the Public Eiearing at 7 : 33
P.M. ex.plaining the circumstances o� this meeting
being reschedule:l because of the blizzard of
December 28 .
City Planner Alan Olson then reviewed the
Ordinance explainirg that since October 25 , 198?_
the rewritting consisted of changes that were
s�.iggested by the pub' ic .
Mayor Van rlest then as�ed if there were any ne�,>
� comments from th� Public regardir.g this
ordinance .
Willie Crear 5G �Iestwood Driv� , Long Lake stated
he is a new o�mer on Big T.sland . He purchased his
property from Mr . Roy Ahern who is a long term
propPrty o�arier on 3ig Isl�nd . Ele owns 3 pieces of
property on the island ; the house that is his
current summer residence , identified as parcel
�58 what is called the Snyder house , identified as
parcel R15 and also he�ind the Snyder house on the
other side of the road riqht of way there is
another piece of property . When this ordinance
c��me up those two pieces o� property 4,ere
� -- - -
. /
A�t MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL , DL:CEP-1BER 30 , :982 PAGE -2-
, , ,
. � ,
. ;
LphE ORDINANCE CON ' T, separated by a road riqht oE �,�ay identiEied by the
� City of Orono as one building site , when in fact
when purchased by Mr . Ahern were two different
sites . For reasons I don ' t understartd , under
your new ordinance , these were combined as one
building site even though they were divided by a
plated city street . It ap�eared the ordinance .
intended to take ,all individual lots and cause
them to be build_able with exception of the ones you
t�lk about . Tn resoonse to that it would appear
the ordinance would cause tnat a numb�r of lots
woulc3 becorne only one lot . Roy sold the lots
before this ordinance went into eFfect . The new
copy of the ordin�nce shows y�u have r�ade changes ,
that chang�s tne time oF the o�aners of record For
these lots , and it is that portion of t�e
ordinance (the owne�s of record) �hat I would like
to take this opportunity to object to . Can I ask
why it was done?
Mayor Van Nest then asked h1r . Olson �or the facts
� on these lots . f�1r . Olson state<�3 the facts of the
matter : ar� L':?�3t he h�s two separate
holdings .The caay trie ordinanc�� is c��ritten . One is
number �58 and that lot is aparoxi�ately . 32
acres , completely separate from the other
holciings [�fr . Ahern had . Tnis was dec�ared
buildable because it has a house on it . �econd
oart is properties that we have combined as '�15
slightly r,orth of the first prope�ty (separated by
,John Dean ' s pro�erty) . Parcel � 15 combined on
b��n sides of_ the right oF way to!�als ?. 1/2 acres .
Neither piece is 2 acr�s by itself , and so under
t��e current code , the 1974 code , it would be one
sit�, or would nor_ be rebuildable . The cabin that
is on that property is completely de�eriorated an,1
is in hazardoas condition at this point . Tnere
was a permit IJJu�� at one time to rebuild it but
was r.ever acted on , i � is not being used and is not
nabitable at this tir;�e . Mr . Olson stated that he
has tallced to ��r . ��hern and Mr . Creer on this
matter in his o`fice .
Mr . Roy Ahern stat�d that he had taken out tne
huildinq permitandhad beendoing some remodeling
in the cabin up until the time he sold the
property.
t�iayor Van Nest asked Mr . Ahern what had he sold ,
. and Mr . Ahern stated that he sold because of the
ordinance bei.ng passed , and he was not going to be
able to use any of that oropetty, he sold all of it .
He stated he solc� a�1 of the parcels except for ��58
because I was not goir.g to be able to use any of the
property the 41;3�/ I w��nted to under the ordinance .
, , �� *�EE`PING OF THE OROti'0 COUNCIL, CECi,t•lI3ER 30 , 1982 P11G�-3-
�' KE ORDINANCE CON 'T. M�yor Van Nest �s,<ed �t this time who ne had sold
the parcel to , hlr . Ahern stated he sold it to
various people , t•tayor V��n Nest asked how marty
people , Mr . Ahern st���ed he sold 6 lots to six
different peop�e . Mr . Ahern stated he had no use
for the property so he sold it . Mayor Van Nest
asked did you have lcnowledge when you sold thern
that this land w�s r�ot buildable? i�lr . Ah�rn ,
stated his attorney said they were buildable as a
seasonal dwelling under �he terms of this
ordina�ce tiie way it had been caritten . Mayor Van
Nest state� , " it woulc? be one building site .
There is not enou�n land tnere for two parcels on
that piece of land under our present code" .
Mr . Ahern again stated under the new ordinance ,
those are over 1!3 acYe , they are all
approximatel_v .�/? �cre and th� new owner should be
intitled to building rights just as Mr . Bacckus
should be intitl�d �o building rigl�ts on his 1/?_
acre .
Mayor Van Nest tnen 5tated , that ne i�eard ��h�t Mr .
Ahern was saying but that he was not getting a
sympathetic ear iron the City because he had
nlenty of knowiedqe knowing ex�ctly �.�hat was going
on �.�hen he solc3 the parcels of l�nd . The City is
going to be extremely resistant to issuing ��
different building permits on those parcels .
Mr . Ahern stated tnat was between the new owners
and the City th�� he did not want to get involved .
Mayor Van n'es�_ sr_ated that he Felt Mr . �hern was
invol��ed , because he had good enough i:nowl�dge of
what the situation was . Mr . Ahern stated he was
upset becau�e ne nad to szll the �and at a discount
to get rid o� it �ecuase it is not �Jorth �s nuch now
with the n�w ordinance pending .
Hurr stated tha` of the six lo�:.s •.Jere sold as
buiidable why dic? he have to take a discount?
Mr . ��iillie Crear �hen stated the timing of the
addition of the lang����7e to r_h� ordinance appears
to be designed sp�cif_ ically to prohibit anymore
parcels in tnis oi?ce .
Mr . Zane S�heftel oi Exce' sior , also present ,
commented that h� wanted his year_ round residence
- grandEathered into the ordinance so that he would
not have any trouble continuing to live there full
time .
There Followec? di:scussion about tn� reasons for
, �,�iF.ETING OF TEiE ORONO C0�?NCIL, DECEMBER 30 , 1982 PAGE-4-
�,��KE ORDINANCE CON ' T . rec�uirin� Eull-ti�;�e residence to have a
condition�l use permit , including the higher
stanc]ards required for Septic Systems , private
� fire protection , etc . Olson stated -that the
i. Sheftel property is �nown to have been used full
`ime and that except for being �l acres instead oL
5 , the property sno�ild now mect or is capable of
meeting all requirem�nts For a principal '
residence Cor.ditional Use Permit . Olson recom-
menc3ed granting th� ScheEetel property a
c:onceptual con� ition��l use permit and �✓�riar�ce
with final �p�roval awaiting conpletion of an
applicaticn F�rm and prepar,�tian of the required
resolution to be recorded in tne prope=ty title .
�
; t-tr . Roy A�ier:� , B��rri� Roa� , ��I�yzata stated that :�e
a felt the or,ii,ance sheuld 'oe held cver until
anotherneeting . Hefeltthepe�rleconcerned were
not given enougl� tir�e t� b� present at this
meeting . The �eputy Clerk then presented to Mr .
� Aherr. a record of all the owners that ���ere notified
of tne change of the ��eeting .
Of 77 nar�es on th� list , n2 were contacted directly
and messag�s were left for nine others . There �r�as
no answer �o repeated calls for nine persons , nine
cthers had unlisted nu�nbers (ot- could not �e
located by the mailing a�dress) , and five out oF
town lon� d � stance cal�s were not attempted .
Thus , �9g of th� ownezs have received telephone
notice of the meeting change .
[�tr . �oy P.herr� reqtlest�d a Principal ?�esidence
Conditional Use Per�it for his parce_l u58 . T�e
sam� as Mr . Scheftel . htr . Olson st� ted that the
house o�z that o�rcei cer_ainly appeared to qualify
b�.lt tnat staff: �ac3 sev?ral ques`ions about the
locat�on of t'�e drainfield to serve the house ; we
think it is on the neign�orinq property . We would
not �hus reco^;:Zend a Condi �ional Use Permi t at
this time until P.hern can provid� more informatior.
to staf� . Ahern had no response .
Councilm�nber 3utler moved , Councilmember Elurr
seconded r_o arl�p= Ordinarlce ;� 245 An Ordinance
Amending the t�lunicipal Code of Orono By Changing
the Zonir.g �istric� Designation and Per �ormance
Standards Apptied to Big Island , Mahpiyata
Island , �nd Deeriny Tsland , draft as amended in
Section _i4 . ;h3c cegarding occ�isonial overniaht
camping in � c?'y u':�� recreation area . P�otion ,
Ayes ( 4 ) - Nays ( !;i .
�
�� �
� - CITY of OR�NO
Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay,Mtnnesota 55323•Municipal Offices
• On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka
• - � e
September 28 , 1983
Mr . Seymour J. Mansfield, Attorney At Law
550 Builders Exchange
609 Second Avenue South
^�inneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Re : Roy Ahern - Big Island Record Lots 15 and 58
Pursuant to RS District Zoning Ordinance No. 246
Dear Mr . Mansfield:
This letter is written in response to your letters received August 28 ,
"1983 , regarding Mr . Ahern and his Big Island properties .
Regarding Record Lot #58 , we have received and are processing Mr .
�Ahern ' s request for an automatic lot area variance for this property
that contains his habitable dwelling, including combination of the
existing tax parcels into one parcel for assessment purposes .
Regardinq Record Lot #15 : Your letter is the first written notice
the City has received which states that Roy Ahern sold portions of
what Ordinance #246 describes as record Lot #15 to six separate
individuals, and provides any notice to the City who those individuals
might be . �
/.�c�����'�1
At the public hearing held December 30 , 1983 , Mr . Ahern and Mr . Wiiliam
Crear III stated in the record that Ahern "owns three pieces of
property on the island. . . " and went on to describe record Lot #58 �
as one piece and record Lot #15 as tw� pieces separated by the
undeveloped road right of way. Later in the meeting Mr . Ahern then
s�..ated he had sold parts of record Lot #15 to six separate individuals ,
bu�` that he had to sell the six lots at a discount because he felt
�_.7.., new ordinance made the lots unbuildable .
T`ze interesting thing is that on May 5 , 1983 , realtor Judy Frommes
,called me to say she was representing Mr . Ahern and she was trying
to sell these same properties for him. She identified all 6 parts
of record Lot #15 including prior platted lots 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 64 and
64 and said she wanted to know the best way to sell and develop
them considering the new ordinance which she knew had been adopted.
BUILUING& ZONING - 473-7357 • AUMIN►STRATION & FINANCE -473•7358 • PUBLIC W'ORKS - 473-7359
ASSESSIN G
� , �eptember 28 , 1983
Page 2
Re : Roy Ahern
She asked about all the various development options available including
combination of Lots 8 , 9 , 10 and 11 into one buildable piece and
Lots 65 and 65 into a second buildable piece. She was advised at
that time to have Mr. Ahern make a formal variance request of the City
for that possibility so that the Planning Commission and Council
could decide the question .
��y letter to Mr . Ahern dated May 16 , 1983 (enclosed) relates that
conversation and goes on to list all the options available to him
under the new ordinance .
At no time , either in Ordinance #246 or otherwise, has the City ever
said that Mr . Ahern could not sell each of the six parcels separately
�� you now state he has done . What the ordinance does say is that by
�eparating these lots they will each fall into the cateqory of a
vacant, unbuildable parcel that can only be used for seasonal-recreational
use of land without structures just like seven other similar properties
on the island.
I think Mr . Ahern and/or the other individuals involved could work
together and with the City to remove the deteriorated structure now
on Lots 64 and 65 and to combine the various lots into one and perhaps
even two good building sites in keeping with the way they have been
owned and used in the past and with the intent of the new zoning
ordinance .
As to the question of "a takinq" which you raise, please remember
that these six lots were never individually buildable , at least not
since the 1967 or 1974 zoning codes became effective long before
Ahern purchased the nroperty; that the four inland lots are not
accessible to the lake except throuah the front lots; that the four
inland lots together total about 1 . 7 acres which did not meet the
minimum two acre requirement of the strictly enforced 1974 zoning;
and that the cabin on Lots 64 and 65 is not in a habitable condition
and requires substantial structural and sanitation improvements .
This new ordinance has not change� any of these facts.
So there you have it. This letter is saying exactly the same thing
to Mr . Ahern that has been said in many public meetings and in other
�neetings and calls between he and I since lastfall . The options
a.re still open for him or any of the other individuals to pursue .
�owever , these six lots will be unbuildable and the City staff will
not be in a position to issue any building permits or other approvals
c.;zless one of two things happens: Either
l . All six lots are combine� as per Ordinance #246 ; or
2 . A formal variance application is made to the City and the
Planning Commission and Council approve of something other
than what Ordinance #246 already allows .
. , �ep,tember 28 , 1983
Page 3
Re : Roy Ahern _
The choice is entirely up to the property owner (s) who may pursue
the administrative procedures established for review of variance
requests . If he (they) choose to do so, they should contact Jeanne
Mabusth, Zoning Administrator at 473-7357 . She will be happy to
assist anyone who wishes to make an application.
���_nce y
lan P . Olson
City Planner
�'nclosure
cc : Mr . and Mrs . Traff
Mr . and Mrs . Steingas
William Crear III
Mr. and Mrs . Campe
Ronald Schumeister
Mr . and Mrs . Cox
September 23 , 1983
Page 2 �
_____ ___-
_
� 4 . RECORD LOT #15 , Roy Ahern. See file
See September 22, 1983 letter in file. This is listed as
j one record lot but he "sold" it in six pieces. So each
� piece is now unbuildable. No permits even to "remodel"
� the vacant cabin until this is resolved. It may be reasonable
, to divide this record lot into two buildable sites, one with
� two lots and the cabin on the shore and one with four lots on
' the back. But the inland lots have access problems and any
such determination requires a formal variance application
and review. The ball is in their court to make such an
`'• application if they want to.
__--___---____--�
__ __.� _ �_
5 . CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS : Go thru Planning Commission & Council .
a) RL #10 Scheftel : �'his is year-round property and homesteaded.
He has animals. He uses City right of way for access.
See comments in record of December 30 , 1982 public hearing:
(1) Process principal use Conditional Use Permit;
should be no problem.
(2) Process Animal use conditional use permit: note
that some neighbors have complained about the goats.
(3) Process riqht of way use license: use of right of
way is reasonable and approvable BUT he does store
much junk, etc on right of way which should not be
necessary or allowed because of public liability and
limitation on use by other inland property (RUUD R.L. 8)
(4) Include automatic area variance with conditional use
permit resolution.
b) RL #34 Pegelow: This is homestead property. It is an old
cabin now that Mr. Pegelow intends to tear down and
replace with a new structure conforming with 75 ' setback
and septic coc�es . A lot combo form has been processed.
(1) Process Principal use conditional use permit:
This should be approvable without problem except
perhaps for continued use of outhouse. Perhaps
Plannin_q Commission will want to set a 3-5 year
deadline for installation of septic system even
if new house not built by then?
(2) Include automatic lot area variance with conditional
use permit resolution.
� �F:
/ � �
V�- ��
t---���
:'� .. ff�/�., � � V
� � �
. � �� .�-.-� 1 S
- ��
�.. .
;� �� � �
��P� , /
� �
�. : � 2r4N�N C'" ��'�''� ..
'1'ricphc�nc 473•7357
� `
�� `�� T T
- CIT`� of OROl\ O
4*
' Pust Uffice liux (i(i•Crystal 13:�y, Minncsota 553'l:�•A1unicipal Offices
E Lf O�i llie Nortlt Shore oj Lnl;e Min,ielo�ika
, =;
• - s c •:
N;a}� 16 , 1983
^4r . Roy E . Ahern
6499 Barrie Road
N,inneapolis , rlinnesota 55435
; _` � � ,�
Re : Big Island ;�Record Lots n15 `& �5�
�_.,......._.._...,....�.,.�..,.�._,...�.e ./ "W
Dear Mr . Ahern :
Enclosed are separate information packets on your two Big Island
lots and their status under the revised zoning ordinance adopted
last December .
I recommend that you consider completing and returning the variance
resolution forms (�2 ) and the lot combination forms (�3 ) for both
of your properties . Doing this will ensure that you receive the
full grandfather benefits of the ordinance designed to protec�
building rights on those properties with eaisting cabins .
;" �' ��
;�ECORD LOT r15 �
I��-you still have a problem with the record lot designation for
Record Lot �15 , then you should not return the variance resolution ,
but should instead return the blue form (#1) and whatever other
.f_actual data you believe will support your challenge .
I have talked to your realtor , Judy Frommes , concerning these
properties and the City ' s position classifying these six lots as '
one building site . As I have said to her and previously to you , I
believe you have the following options available :
1. . Accept the City designation and retain all six lots together as
one building site . You could rebuild the existing cabin (? ) or
more likely , replace it with a new cabin located either in the
front or to the rear . In this case , I suggest you sign and return
, the variance resolution to guarantee the automatic/no fee variance .
2 . You could sell the back lots to another abutting property owner
who could then combine them into his property without creating.
a new building site . In this case , to rebuild the cabin on the
• front lot, you would have �o formally apply for a change in the
record lot designation and for a lot area variance , and perhaps for
other variances . Such variances would most likely be approved but
th� burden would be on you to :
Mr . Roy E. Ah�rn
May 16 , 1983
Page 2
a) show that the record lot split/sale would not create another
building site ; and
b) sho��: that the resulting small�r front properties would , indeed,
support a well and septic system.
3 . Finally , if you wish to challenge the City ' s position and apply
to divide this record lot into 2 building sites, you will have to
file a formal variance request to be heard by the Planning Commission
and City Council with supporting data about ownership history and
usage ; you �aill need a plan for providing access to the back lots ;
and you will need surveys and soil testing to demonstrate that both
sites can support private wells and septic systems . This option
is not the intent of the new ordinance . However , you may have
valid reasons or hardships enough to justify the variances . The
burden will be on you to demonstrate these hardships . The City
Council may approve or deny such an application , but you do have
the option of making t�e application .
4 . If you choose to do nothing , the record lot designation in the
ordinance will stand, but any future building on the lot will not
be permitted until the same or similar lot area variances/lot
combinations are formally applied for and recorded at that time .
I would suggest that you complete the process now to avoid this
potential cost and delay .
RECORD LOT r58
At the December 30 , 1982 City Council meeting , you asked about a
conditional use permit for year-round use of your cabin on this property.
I have enclosed the application form �4-1 , which needs to be completed
and returned along with the lot combinatiion form �2 , if you wish to
have such a request considered by the Council .
Our major concern with your property is sanitation . Please carefully
complete questions 13 and 19 . We will have to see a site survey or
at least , a scale drawing of your lot showing where the house , well
and septic system are located .
6�lhen you return this information to the City , we will review it and
place it on the next Planning Commission agenda for formal review and
xecommendation to the City Council .
� ' T apologize for the delay in getting this information to you . You will �
note that the ordinance and attached forms include a July l , 1983 ,
deadline for your response . I would appreciate your response by that
date , but because this notice was delayed, we will extend the actual
" deadlin� to September 1, 1983 . Thank you for your cooperation .
Sincerely , / �
�� �
,/� j� .G�
, �,
Alan P . 0 son ;'�
City Plann�r �
Encl n��irn