The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1988-01-11 Resolution 2342. .7s WHEREAS, applicants") are the Road within the City follows: Cite of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2342 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 (A) AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8 FILE #643 Bruce Curtiss and Camille Curtiss (hereinafter "the owners of the property located at 1920 Eagerness Point of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as That part of Lot 27, Fagerness, lying North and East of a line described as follows: Commencing at a point on the Suutheasterly line of Under -The -Linden Avenue, which said point is marked by a judicial monument, a distance of 175 feet Northeasterly along said avenue from the Southwest corner of said Lot 27; thence bearing South 34 degrees 14' East a distance of 69.00 feet to a point marked by a judicial monument; thence continuing on an extension of said line to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, this application has involved the reconsideration of an original variance application (#643) approved by the .:ity Council on September 14, 1981 that would have required that applicants install a turnaround within their street yard and portions of unused right-of-way of Fagerness Point Road. In addition, applicants seek variances to Sections 10.03, Subdivision 15 (C), 10.22, Subdivision, 1 (B) and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 for an existing fence at 6 feet in height that exceeds the allowed height of 3�, located within 75 feet of the lakeshore and proposed within 26 feet of a designzted wetland. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This aplration was revi=wed as Zoning File #643. 2. The property is located in the LR-lC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 19, 1987, and recommended unanimous approval of the variances rplication allowing a 3h foot high fence based upon the following f indi"'. G Page 1 of 5 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2342 here is no unique hardship to the land that would require a 6 foot high fence. B) A 34 foot fence with plantings can provide the necessary protection for children if both are installed with specific care in placement of plantings to insure there is no negative impact on required sight distance. C) The Planning Commission felt the turnaround should be installed as required. 4. On November 9, 1987 and November 23, 1987, the Orono Council considered the application and noted the following findings: A) The existing six foot high fence creates a visua'/safety hazard for users of public roaJ and for children who exit the property. B) Adequate sight distance is essential if a turnaround is not installed on the property. A 3 1/2 foot fence with plantings at limited height in designated areas can accomplish applicants goals for protection of children and privacy in limited yard area. C) To allow a 3 1/2 foot fence along the street lot line of the property, located within the lakeshore protected area. would be consistent with pAst actions of the City Council based on valid, similar findings noted in this review. D) Economic considerations are not valid reasons to grant variances per Section 10.08 Subdivision 3A(4) of the Municipal Code. E) Sections of the 6 foot privacy fence have been .:nstalled within the road right-of-way of Fagerness Point Road. F) The 6 foot privacy fence has been installed within 75 feet of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka. G) Approving a 6 foot high privacy fence to provide privacy has not been a valid reason for the granting of variances in light of recent denials. The approval of this privacy fence would establish a negative precedent in the consideration of similar applications in the future. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 5 city of ORONO ` RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 2342 NO. 6. The City Council finds that the coi::zitions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would 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 applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Compren�?nsive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (A) and Section 10.55, Cubdivision 8 to permit the installation of a 3� foot high fence totally located within 75 feet of the lakeshore per survey dated 10/13/70 by Gordon R. Coffin and within 26 feet of a designated wetlands per City of Orono's Designated Wetlands Map of the North 1/2 of Section 17 and to waive the requirement that applicants install a turnaround on the property, subject to the following conditions: 1. A 3� foot high fence may be maintained at the present location of the existing r foot fence, portions of which are located within the rigL --of-way of Fagerriess Point Road. Applicants shall execute a hold harml- agreement in order to hold the City harmless for any and all damages resulting from the placement of said fence within the road right-of-way. 2. No plantings to exceed a height of 3h feet at maturity shall be i planted within an area bounded by the driveway to the south and i northeast 35 feet along the street line as described in Exhibit u of 1 the November 9, 1987 Council packets in exchange for waiving the ; condition that would have required a turnaround on the property. 3. The height of the existing fence shall be altered to meet the approved height of 3h feet by April 1st, 1988. 4. Authorities granted with this resolution 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 approval, for the new sections of the proposed 34 foot fence, ` or this variance will expire on that date (January 11, 1989). 5. Violation of or non-compliance with .ny of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 3 of 5 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2342 6. The undersigned applicant have read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. 1988. Adopted by the Orono City Counci i on this 11th day of January, Jam s R. Grabek, Mayor A&,69 C' 6 " - Prope-rty Owner(s) Page 4 of S City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2342 STATE OF MIaNFSOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 198 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the persons described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this ld 2Y day of /`Lrrar✓ _, 198e, before me a Notar Public wit in and for said'County, personally appeared known to me to be the persons described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. - --10MY HAROLD L. GlK1AFpN WARY PUBLIC-MMMR501A HEIMIEPMI CWNiY COMM. EXPIRES )AN. 19. 1991 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 5 of 5 ra I