HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 1394 a '
, y.
• -
� . Ci.t� o� ORONO
� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
y • NO. i �Aa •
�
• ' • • A RESOLUTION DENYING SETBACK VARIANCES FOR
PROPOSED STRUCTURES ON LOTS INVOLVED IN A
CURRENT SUBDIVISION APPLTCATION FOR
WILLIAM D. GREGORY AND DAVID J. DUFF
.
WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized
and existing under the laws of the State of 1�Iinnesota; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to State Statutes 41.2 et. seq. and 462 et. seq.
the City Gouncil of the City of Orono� has adopted zoning regulata.ons for
the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance 34. 352 and Ordinance 32 . 300
William D. Gregory and David J.. Duff, hereinafter referred to as the
applicants, have applied for side setback variances for a proposed
principal structure and an attached garage to an existing principal
structure on two lots included in a subdivision application which is
currently being reviewed by the Orono Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the applicants' sub.division .�nd variance applications
� involve the following legally describea properties:
The legal description of the Duff property is:
That part of Government Lot 1 in Section 11, Town-
ship 117 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal
Meridian, described as follows: Beginning at a
point 585. 84 feet Southeasterly measured along a
line which bears South 10 degrees East from the
meander corner at the Northeast corner of Government
Lot 1 in said Section 11; thence South 67 degrees
48 minutes West 192. 97 feet more or less to the
shore of Alud Lake (so called) ; thence Northerly and
Westerly along the shore of said lake to its inter-
section with a line drawn South at right angles to
� the North line of said Section 11, from a point .
therein distant 373. 35 feet West of aforesaid meander
� corner at the Northeast corner of said Government
Lot 1 in said Section; thence rlorth along said right-
angle line to a point 40 feet South of the North line
of said Section 11; thence East parallel with the
North line of said Section and distant 40 feet South
therefrom to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence .
Southerly along the shore of said lake to its inter-
• section with �a line which bears North 67 degrees
48 minutes East from the point of beginning; thence
South 67 degrees 48 minutes �aest 14 . 3 fAet more or
less to the point of beginning. (Property Identification
No.
Page 1 of 7
� C�t� o� ORONO
• - .
� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL . ,
� NO. 1394
•
• • � •
� The legal description of the Gregory property is:
That part of Governm�nt Lot 4 , Section 2 , Township
117, Range 23 formerly platted as Blocks 15 , 16 �
and 18 of Orono now vacated, together with all .
vacated avenues, (except that portion of Brackett
Avenue comprising County Road 15, ) streets and alleys
abutting and adjoining said blocks.
That part of Section 2 , Township 117, Range 23
lying East of said Brackett Avenue and known and '
designated in the plat of Orono, now vacated, as
public reserve which lies Southerly of the .following ,
, described line : Comi;lencing at the meander corner on
the South line of said Section, thence North 4 degre�s •
15 minutes East 323. 7 feet to a point on the East
line of said Brackett Avenue, said poirit being the
. beginning of the line to be described; thence South
29 degrees 25 minutes �ast 65 feet to the shore o£
Lake �linnetonka.
' All that part of Government Lot l, Section 11,
Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the 5th� k\
Principal Meridian, described as follows : Commencing
� at the intersection of the North• line of said Lot 1
with the shore of Lake n�innetonka thence West along.
t:ie Ydorth line of said Lot 1 to .the Southeasterly
� boundary line of the right of way of the Great
�^Iorthern Railway Company thence Southwesterly along
, the Southeasterly boundary line of said right of way
to the VJest line of said Lot 1, thence South along
the 6Vest line of said Lot 1 to the shore of r-lud Lake,
(so called) ; thence Easterly along the shore of said �
Mud Lake to its intersection with a line drawn South
at right angles to the Plorth line of said Lot 1 from
� a point therein distant 373. 35 feet West of the
meander corner at the Northeast corner of said Lot 1;
thence North along said right angle line to a point
40 feet South of the ilorth line of said Lot l; thence
East parallel with the 2lorth line of said Lot 1 and '
� distant 40 feet South therefrom to the shore of Lake
Minnetonka; thence Northerly along the shore of said
• lake to the point of beginning.
hereinafter referred to as the property; and
Page 2 of 7 .
� f
• -
(� C�t� o� ORONO
� RESOWTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL .,
� NO. 1394
•
• � • •
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the application; the
recommendations of staff and the Planning Commission and the letters
and comments of the applicants' attorney.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City
of Orono hereby denies the variance application of William D. Gregory
and David J. Duff for side setback variances for future structures on
proposed lots included in a subdivision that has yet to receive
preliminary approval from the City Council based on one or more of the
following findings of fact:
1) The property is located within the LR-1A zoning district
, and requires a minimum of 2 acres in area for �each lot.
2) The property consists of 12. 80 acres. �
3) The propo.sed 4 lot plat consists of 9 . 96 acres of dry
� contiguous land exclusive of wetlands areas, road
right of way and riparian outlots; Total dr y area
satisfies the 4 1ot density.
4) The proposed l.ot areas are as follows:
a) Lot 1 3. 06 acres dry
2. 32 wetlands
5. 38 Total acres
b) Lot 2 2. 78 dry
. . 10 wetlands '
2.88 Total acres
c) Lot 3 1.81 acres dry
. 34 acres wetlands
2. 15 Total acres
d) Lot 4 2. 00 acres dry
. 09 wetlands �
2. 09 Total acres
5) The Orono Septic Consultant, Mi.chael Gaffron, reports
all lots meet the standards of the Orono On-Site
Septic Code based on the septic test information and
• the recommended septic design for each new system.
Page 3 of 7 �
•
� Clt� o� ORONO
� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL .
� NO. 1394
•
• - • •
6) On June 21, 1982, the applicants fi.led a variance
application with the City requesting the following:
a) Side Setback Variance for Principal Structure
Lot 2 - side yard setback
required 30 ' �
proposed 20' •
varianc� 10' or 33�
b) Side Setback Variance for Attached Garage to
Principal Structure �
Lot 3 - side yard setback
required 30'
existing 50 '
proposed 10 ' '
variance 20' or 67�
. 7) Prior to the filing of that application, the applicants'
attorney, Larry Berg, was advi.sed by both the City
Planner and the Zoning Administrator that Council h�s
never approved a setback variance for proposed lots
under subdivision review because lot lines can still be
rearranged. . �
�
8) During the variance review at the Planning Commission,
Larry Berg presented the following findings:
a) The existing driveway serving both lots 2 & 3.
is situated so that it would serve an attached
garage only on the west side of the ' existing
house on Lot 3 .
b) The interior design of existing house on Lot 3 �
would not make attachment o n east side of house
feasible. •
c) The architect for the proposed new home on Lot 2
� finds the proposed location the only suitable �
site for a house of the proposed size and retain
a view of the lake.
�
Page 4 of 7
f '
•
� Clt� o� ORONO
� RESOLUTfON OF THE CITY COUNCIL .
� NO. 1394
•
• � • • .
9) In a letter dated, April 2, 1982, Larry Berg cited
, "unique geography" concerns in locating house sites
on newly created lots.
10) Planning Commission noted that in review of the
septic site locations, defined setback area and
sloping to north and west of house site that with
minimal changes the new home on Lot 2 could be .
located meeting the 30' side setback standard.
11) In review of the septic site locations, required
setbacks and sloping, to the east, Planning Commission
determined a detached garage or a smaller sized
attached garage could be constructed on Lot 3
meeting required setback standards.
12) On June 21, 1982, the Orono Planning Commission
voted unanimously to recommend deni.al of the side
• setback variance application involving Lots 2 & 3
based on the finding that all lo�s meet the
standards of .the LR-lA zoning district and that
with rearranging the shared lot line and minimal
construction considerations that both a principal
structure and attached garage could be legally �
located on Lots 2 & 3. ,
13) Berg advised Orono staff that he wanted to have
the variance application as proposed before the '
Planning Commission scheduled for Council .review
and action.
14) On Ju1y 12, 1982, the Orono Council reviewed the
prop.osed variance application making the following
findings: �
a) The proposed attached three sta1.1 garage on .
Lot 3 could be reduced in size and meet the
req uired setback.
b) A detached garage could be located on Lot 3
requiring only 10 ' setbacks from property lines.
c) The lot lines under consideration-are not fix�d .
• and may be realigned during preliminary subdivision
review.
d) If there is a physical hardship such as severe
sloping of �the land area placing limits on the
� location of suitable septic area and house site
that this has not been demonstrated.
Page 5 of 7
�' � t
•
(� � . Clt� o� ORONO
� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ..
NO. 1394
�
• � • •
15) In Berg' s letter of June 29, 1982, he makes the
following comment:
"If health, safety and welfare considerations are
not affected in a planned residential development
by a 30 foot separation between buildings on �
adjoining parcels of land, I da not see how they
could be denied to be adversely affected in the
present care. "
16) The denial of this variance application by both
Planning Commission and Council was not denied on
the basis of adverse affects to the health, safety
and welfare of the community but was clearly based
on the foll.owing: '
a) To approve setback variances for future
construction on lots currently involved in -
• a subdivision review would be in complete
conflict with the intent and objectives of
the platting code, the LR-lA zoning district
, and the Orono Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
b) Throughout this review we have heard claims of
specific hardships to the land but the applicant
has failed to demonstrate this hardshin. The
Council has responded to� the application as presented
finding adequate area to locate both the proposed
and principal structure on Lot 2 and an attached
or detached garage on Lot 3. Applicants made no
attempt to modify the variance application after
staff and Planning Commission review.
c) The Couricil cannot •grant variances based on the
convenience of th.e applicants but must be based
on demonstrated hardship. .
'd) Council finds no special conditi:ons apply to this
application as proposed that would permit the
granting of the setback variances.
•
Page 6 of 7
.. .- : r
•
� C�t� o� ORONO
�� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ..
� NO. 1394
•
• • • •
Council further advises the applicants that in the case
of the lot with an existing principal structure that Council would
consider a variance setback of 10 feet for an attached garage subject
to the Gregory' s future house meeting a1l. setback standards of the
LR-lA zoning district and that there• be sufficient hardships demon�strated
for the variance review. .
Adopted by the Orono City Council this 26 day of
July , 1982 .
i
William B. Van Nest, Mayor '
• � .
ATTEST: .
� �
. • �
� �G��t� //l. �;�<%lif�� � !
Alberta M. Strom, City Clerk
• . -
.
Page 7 of 7 •