The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutResolution 7381 CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL A ,, t� �� No. 73 81 'EsHpe- t A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1279 FILE NO. LA23-000023 WHEREAS,on May 15,2023,Bob Renaud with Minnesota Green o/b/o Brent Longval(hereinafter the"Applicant"),applied for a variance from the City Code for the property addressed 1856 Shadywood Road and legally described as: Lot 26 and the Northerly 15 feet of Lot 27, Shady Wood, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County,Minnesota(hereinafter the"Property"); WHEREAS,the Applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a setback variance from City Code Section 78-1279 in order to replace an existing retaining wall within the lakeyard with a different material; and WHEREAS,the Applicant made a complete application on May 19th, 2023; and WHEREAS,on June 20,2023,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 June 20,2023,the Planning Commission voted 5 to 0 in favor of a motion to recommend approval of the variances as applied; and WHEREAS,on July 10,2023 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 the requested variances 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#LA23-000023. 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. 1 CITY OF ORON o a RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL A �� ,� NO. 73 81 kEsxo4 2. The Property is located in the LR-1C One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Property contains 23,247 square feet in area and has a defined lot width of 75.14 feet at the 75- foot lakeshore setback and a lot width of 75.14 feet at the OHWL. 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 variances: a. 75 foot Lakeshore Setback 6. In considering this application for variances, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation 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. ANALYSIS: 1. "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance . . . ."Preserving and protecting existing trees in the lake yard is in harmony with the intent of the ordinance. This criterion is met. 2. "Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan."The proposed retaining walls will continue to maintain the integrity of the slope and protect the existing tree. The proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan. This criterion is met. 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 owner has proposed retaining walls to protect the existing tree. The existing failing walls are not the result of actions by the owner. This criterion is met. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. 2 -WQ CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 7381 44-EsHopt The existing house and deck were not constructed by the current property owners. The applicant is requesting the average lakeshore setback variance to expand the existing deck for better use and fit for the current family's needs; and c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." There are existing retaining walls in the lake yard. The variance to permit the expanded retaining wall structure within the 75-foot lake setback will preserve the existing tree and character of the area. This criterion is met. 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 a residential use is a permitted use in the LR-1C 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 slope of the property combined and condition of the existing improvements are unique conditions affecting the subject property.This criterion is met. 9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located." The failing timber wall configuration, and the existing tree create conditions which do not apply to all of the adjacent properties. This criterion is met. 10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant."Granting a setback variance to allow the retaining walls within the 75- foot lake setback to be reconstructed with an expanded footprint is reasonable,is a better solution long- term, and is necessary to preserve the rights of the owner and neighboring property. The variance is supported by practical difficulty.This criterion is met. 3 CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL *IlL ' �G��lNO. 73 81 /CESHO� 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."Granting the lake yard setback variance allowing the retaining walls within the 75-foot lake setback will not adversely impact health, safety, comfort or morals,or in any way be contrary to the ordinances.This criterion is met. 12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant,but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty."The proposed walls within the lake yard will continue to preserve the integrity of the slope and existing tree.Preserving the existing tree is necessary and not merely a convenience.This criterion is met. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS: Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance from Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-1279 to allow the reconstruction of an existing retaining wall with a new material roughly 8 feet from the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings. 2. The approved project shall conform to the attached site plan and building plans submitted by the Applicant and annotated by City staff(hereinafter the "Plans"), attached to this Resolution as Exhibits A. 3. Additional screening of the walls be implemented to preserve the natural vegetated view from the lake where feasible. 4. All work must be contained to the subject property.Permission must be submitted with the building permit from the abutting property owner if any construction or grading work is proposed outside of the property boundary. 5. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 6. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction and commencing construction of said project. A framing inspection must be completed within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date(July 10, 2024). 4 ca,,\il O► CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ��' C., NO. 7381 `.kESHo�``` 7. 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 10th day of July, 2023. • ATT ST: CITY OF ORONO: 4712g . k Wt. Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh,Mayor 5 LA23-000023 Res. No. 7381 Exhibit A E02 TOW 937.50' BOW 935.00' REMOVE TIMBERS BOULDER OUTCROPS LONGVAL RESIDENCE 1856 SHADYWOOD RD ORONO, MN 55392 327 Marschall Road STE 365Shakopee, MN 55379(952) 496-3105WWW.MNGREEN.COM1" = 4'PLAN INFORMATION BR05/01/20220922108VARIANCE REQUEST PLAN Notes 1. 2. 3. 4. WALLS 5' FROM O.H.W. LINE EXSITING OAK TREE ADJUST GRADE OUT MINIMAL AMOUNT ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE 1 2 3 4