HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 4956 - -- - , ,
� •y
= Q . . RESOLUTION EXPIRED �
'� '�' ---___-- - _ _ _ _
0 , 0 �
� � , � CITY of ORON�
a - ;. �
,
��� �p'�' . RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
`�k'ES8�4 NO. _ L�. � �
A RESOLUTION GRANTING LOT AREA AND WIDTH VARIANCES
AND DENYING SIDE SETBACK VARIANCES
TO MUPTICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6
FII.E NO. 02-2859 �
WHEREAS,Blake Bichanich and Mary Bichanich,husband and wife,(hereina$er
"the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 332 Westlake Street,within the City of
Orono (hereinafter"the City") and legally described as follows: � .
� LOTS 4 & 5, BLOCK 1, HILLSIDE PARK, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
� (hereinafter"the properly"); and . .
WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal . .
Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 to allow construction of a new home on a 1.34 acre lot
• where 2 acres are required with a lot width of 100.28' where 200' is required and side setbacks of
11' to the south and 19.3' to the north where 30' is required in the LR-lA zoning district; 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 22, 2003, at which time all persons desiring to be
heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOI,VED by the City Council of Orono,
Minnesota: •
]FINDINGS �
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File#02-2859.
2. The property is located in the LR-lA Zoning District, where 2.0 acres are the �
minimum required lot area. The property consists of approximately 1.34 acres.
� 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on January 22, 2003 �
and recommended approval by a vote of 6 to 1 to permit construction of a new home
• on a 1.34 acre lot where 2 acres are required with a lot width of 100.28' where 200'
Page 1 of 5 .
r
` O '
� •�
O O .
� '�� � CITY of ORONO
,� '� �- ti .
�r RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
��L �Gti .
`9kEsYI�g' . NO. � e�, a � .
is required and side yard setbacks of not more than 20 feet on each side,permitting
_ up to a 4 foot encroachment into either side yard for roof overhang but for no other
� building elements, and requiring the removal of the existing shed in the 0-75'
hardcover zone.
4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact:
A. In 1993,the property owner cbmbined two 50' wide lots in order to create a
lot that was closer to conformity with the lot area and width requirements of
. the zoning district;
B. The applicants were permitted to build a home on the combined lots in 1993
� �vith substandard side yard setbacks, lot area and lot width; _ ,
C. The combined lot is very long and narrow, creating difficult conditions to
build a home that takes full advantage of the lakeshare;
� D. The existing detached garage is currently located over the property line to the
south and will be removed with tlus application; and �
• E. An existing non-conforming shed, located in the 0-75' lakeshore setback
zone, will be removed with this application and replaced with a lock box
compliant with City size standards.
5. On March 10, 2003, the City Council heard the Planning Commission's
recommendations regarding the application. At that time, the City Council was
reluctant to agree with the hardships identified by the Planning Commission as they
pertained to the proposed side yard setback variances. Therefore, the City Council
tabled the application to allow the applicants to meet with staff to further discuss the
proposal.
6. On Apri114,2003,the City Council heard the applicant's revised variance proposal
which incorporated the Planning Commission's recommendation of 20' side yard
setbacks,as opposed to the applicant's original proposal of 11' and 19.3' where 30'
is required.The City Council�vas unable to identify a hazdship to permit substandard
side yard setbacks for the proposed new construction.
7. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it
and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district;that granting the .
variances will not adversely affect traffic conditions,light,air,nor pose a fire hazard
or other danger to neighboring property;would not merely serve as a convenience to
the applicants,but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is
• Page 2 of 5 �
� �� -
O �
� '_ � �, CITY of OR4N0
� , .;.. � _
.ti
�'� G'�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
. . .�`�kEsKO4"� . rvo. 4 9 � � �
necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in
keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the
City.
8. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and
recommendations of the Plaruiing Commission,reports by City Staff,comments by
the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and
welfare of the community. �
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER,AND CONDITIONS
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants
variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 to permit construction of a new
home on a 1.34 acre lot where 2 acres are required with a lot width of 100.28' where 200' is
required.The City Council hereby denies a variance to Municipal Zoning Code 10.23,Subdivision 6 .
• to permit side yard setbacks of 20' where 30' is required. Approval is subject to the following
conditions:
1. Approval is conditioned on the removal of the existing shed in the 0-75' hardcover
setback zone.
2. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants,but
are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within
one year of the date of Council approyal, or these variances will expire on that date
(Apri128, 2004). • _ ' .
3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance
� . shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any
� authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor.
4. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of
this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns,
hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property.
• Page 3 of 5
!
. � �1V' '
O �
� �� ? � � CITY of ORONO
�(' • �b r• � � .. . . .
. �
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
���kEs�I�4�G . . � � No. � � � �
Adopted by the City Council of the City or Orono,Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the
28th day of April, 2003.
ATTEST:
�,��:� � U�.e� °�
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson,Mayor
Property Owner(s) . _--------- _
• STATE OF MINNESOTA �
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 28th day of April, 2003 by
Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said
instrument was executed on behalf of the City. '
�"��° � °if_y(.�9�•C�--r1C�-�..-,,e�
KRIS P��.�4�D�ER��N
. NGY&RY PU�Li�-P�!!t�NFS�TA Z° Notary Public
��'f��` ;: �fy Conmiss?an Facp ^�. �,,t�� f'y
a,r,�.a�r�'.,��:-��"..r�c='--;-- ' �
,�, .;._
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
���
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this�day of April,2003
by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota munici�Sal corporation and said
instrument was executed on behalf of the City.
� L��`�.- � .
;��-.`�. .` i•2ACH�L 1�OD�E Notary Public
, .; NOTARY PU(3LIC-�'Jan 31�T�
• � � .- My Canmissan Exp'ues .
�.�-�-�.�=-� Pa�e.4 of 5
. � o .
� �
0 0 .
� '� g ; . � CITY of ORONO
� : �
� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
��l ��'~
� `9kESI30g' NO. � � � �
State of Minnesota )
) ss.
County of Hennepin )
This instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,2003
, by Blake Bichanich,husband of Mary Bichanich.
Notary Public . ,
� State of Minnesota )
) ss.
County of Hennepin )
This instniment was acknowledged before me this day of ,2003
by Mary Bichanich,wife of Blake Bichanich.
Notary Public
•
Page 5 of 5