HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 7620 Variance Addition 880 Partenwood Rd LAND TYPE Torrens (T)
DOC NUM 6158529
Certified, filed and/or recorded on
Sep 16, 2025 8:05 AM
Office of the Registrar of Titles
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Amber Bougie, Registrar of Titles
Daniel Rogan, County Auditor and Treasurer
Deputy 122 Pkg ID 2827070E
Document Recording Fee $46.00
Document Total $46.00
Existing Certs
778080
This cover sheet is now a permanent part of the recorded document.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss
CITY OF ORONO )
I certify the foregoing are the original resolutions adopted by the City Council on September 8, 2025.
Officially signed as City Clerk of Orono, Minnesota and the seal of the city.
h Stine Lusi , City Clerk
frsh
R 1,
c ,f.lrr,` te;
cL0Ar CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
1-* No. 7620
kESHO°
A RESOLUTION
APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM
MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 6.12.6240
FILE NO. LA25-000035
WHEREAS, on July 23, 2025, Miller Dunwiddie Architecture, Inc. (hereinafter the
"Applicant"), applied for a variance from the City Code for the property addressed 880 Partenwood
Road, Orono and legally described as:
Lot 6, Block 1, Partenwood, Hennepin County, State of Minnesota
(hereinafter the "Property");
WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance
from Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 6.12.6240 for a 757-square-foot addition to the
primary residence 7.1 feet lakeward of the average lakeshore setback; and
WHEREAS, on August 18, 2025, 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 August 18, 2025, the Planning Commission voted 6 to 0 in favor of
a motion to recommend approval of the variance as recommended by staff; and
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2025, 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 variance as described above based on one or more of the
following findings of fact concerning the Property:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
Al. This application was reviewed as Zoning File LA25-000035. 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.
A2. The Property is located in the LR-1 B, One-Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District.
sz._ONO CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
�e NO. 7620
`4'EsHO �
A3. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25% according to the Stormwater
Quality Overlay District, and the Applicant is proposing 20.6% hardcover, where 25% is
allowed, with this project.
A4. The Applicant applied for average lakeshore setback variance for the proposed project.
A5. In considering this application for a variance, 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.
VARIANCE ANALYSIS:
B1. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of the ordinance; the proposed addition will not impact lake views, and the
affected, adjacent neighbor has submitted a letter indicating their views will not be
impacted; and
B2. Variances shall only be permitted when consistent with the comprehensive plan; a
variance to expand an existing single-family residential home is consistent with the plan;
and
B3. 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
proposes a reasonable addition that creates a minimal encroachment into the
average lakeshore setback; and
b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created
by the landowner; the existing house is located in a unique configuration on the
Property, where the average lakeshore setback does not leave a reasonable,
conforming building envelope for the home. The configuration of the current home
limits the use of the site. The circumstances are unique to the Property not created
by the landowners; and
2
�O�O CITY No. 7 OF620 ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
.
c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; the
proposed addition would not impact the neighbors'views of the lake, nor substantially
encroach into the average lakeshore setback, and will fit the character of the area.
B4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties; economic
considerations do not impact the finding of practical difficulties with the Property; and
B5. 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; and
B6. 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; and
B7. 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; and
B8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such
property or immediately adjoining property; the addition is proposed near the garage to allow
for reasonable access. The irregular shape of the Property and the location of the current
home is unique to the site. The addition is proposed on the lake side of the house, furthest
from the lakeshore, to minimize impacts; and
B9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the
land is located; the Property has a unique shape and shoreline and the house has a restrictive
building envelope, where expansions would encroach either into boundary setbacks or into
the average lakeshore setback, and
B10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the Applicant; the existing home is located in a narrow building
envelop on the Property. The proposed addition is minimal in size and the Applicant has
provided a letter of support that the addition should not have an impact on lake views,
preserving the intent of the average lakeshore setback; and
B11. 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 a variance
would not be contrary to the intent of the average lakeshore setback to protect the lakeviews
of adjacent owners; and
icLOAtO CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
�� ��� NO. 7620
r9kEsH0�fc
B12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the Applicant, but is
necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty; the granting of the requested variance would
be reasonable, and that the addition has minimal impacts on adjacent properties and lake
views.
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 Section 6.12.6240 for a 757-square-foot addition to
the primary residence 7.1 feet lakeward of the average lakeshore setback, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings.
2. The approved project shall conform to the construction plans and site plan submitted by
the Applicant, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A.
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 owners, but are
permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a permit for the building addition 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
(September 8, 2026).
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 8th day of September, 2025.
ATTES / CITY OF O:
Christ �sian, Pr Clerk Bob Tunheim, Mayor
4
(Example) (Garage) A B C D E F G H I J K L Existing Housev Wood Deck below 75' setback (built prior to 1992)Wood Deck above 75' setback minus Removed Portionv v Stone pavement areasv Paver Drivewayv Retaining WallAC Unit 1 - relocatedAC Unit 2 - relocatedGenerator Pad - relocatedv 2 2 2 AdditionNew Wood DeckPROPOSED SITE PLANA-2ABCDDDEFGHIJKEncroachment intoAverage LakeshoreSetback - blue hatch16.1
FIRST FLOOR PLAN1/16" = 1'-0"SECOND FLOOR PLAN1/16" = 1'-0"
EXISTING GARAGEPROPOSED ADDITIONSOUTH ELEVATION3/32" = 1'-0"EXISTING ENTRYBEYONDEXISTING GARAGEPROPOSED ADDITIONCEMENT SIDING & TRIM TOMATCH EXISTINGTRIM TO ALIGN AND MATCHEXISTINGHIGH WINDOWS3/32" = 1'-0"WEST ELEVATION