HomeMy WebLinkAbout#16-3812 Recorded Resolution 6605'? ~ J3rtrWX-~ /)/."~
lll-38/'L
III II I 1111111111111111
Doc No A10314597
Certified, filed and/or recorded on
May 16, 2016 2:00 PM
Office of the County Recorder
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Martin McCormick, County Recorder
Mark Chapin, County Auditor and Treasurer
Deputy 116 Pkg ID 1392631M
Document Recording Fee $46.00
Document Total $46.00
This cover sheet is now a permanent part of the recorded document.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
6 6 0 G NO. _________ _
A RESOLUTION
GRANTING A VARIANCE TO
ORONO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1279(6)
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
925 BROWN ROAD NORTH
-FILE NO. 16-3812
WHEREAS, Gregory G. Reitan, single and Sally S. Neubauer, single (hereinafter
the "Applicants") are Owners of the property located at 925 Brown Road North within the City of
Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows:
Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter the "property"); and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2016 the Applicants made a complete application to the
City for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279(6) in order to allow them
to remodel and construct additions to their existing residence, such additions being lakeward of
the defined average lakeshore setback line where no such encroachment is normally allowed; and
WHEREAS, on March 21, 2016 after published and mailed notice in accordance
with Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the Orono 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 March 21, 2016, the Planning Commission on a vote of 5-0
recommended approval of the variance; and
WHEREAS, on April 11, 2016, the City Council reviewed the application and the
recommendations of the Planning Commission and City staff.
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 this property:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
Al. 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.
Page 1 of6
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
t I.. R r NO. ____ fJ:::...._O::!......_lyc;:./...1.1_,:..._-' 1' __ _
A2. The Property is located within the RR-lB Single Family Rural Residential District which
requires a minimum lot area of 2.0 acres and a minimum lot width of 200' for
construction of a single family residence.
A3. The Property is 1.89 acres in area, being approximately 190 feet in defined width at the
OHWL of Dickey Lake as well as at the 150' lakeshore setback line, and contains an
existing single family residence. The property is considered as legally nonconforming
with regard to lot area and lot width.
A4. The property is located within Storm Water Overlay District Tier 1 which allows 25%
hardcover. The proposed additions increase the hardcover on the property from 12.9% to
17.3%, still well below the maximum hardcover allowance.
AS. The Applicants propose to remodel the existing residence and construct a new garage
addition. This is a lakeshore lot on Dickey Lake and because the existing residence
structure on the adjacent lakeshore lot to the south is very near Brown Road, the
Applicants' existing home and proposed additions are lakeward of the defined average
lakeshore setback line. The property is nearly 2 acres in area, and both the existing home
and proposed additions meet all other setback, hardcover and structural coverage
requirements, including the required 150' setback from the OHWL of Dickey Lake.
A6. The location of the Applicants' existing residence is conforming to the zoning standards
of the RR-lB Rural Residential District. However, the Shoreland Overlay District
regulations regarding average lakeshore setback are impossible to meet for constructing
additions to Applicants' home. The adjacent residence structure on the lakeshore lot to
the immediate south is located less than 15 feet from the Brown Road right-of-way where
a 50' setback would normally be required. That adjacent home is one of the original
farmhouses in the Dickey Lake area and has been at this location for many decades. If
that residence was setback the minimum 150' from the OHWL of Dickey Lake,
Applicants would not need an average setback variance. Additionally, due to 1) the
curvature of the lakeshore; 2) the location of the additions; and 3) the substantial amount
of vegetative screening along applicants' south lot line, the neighboring property's
existing lake views would appear to not be impacted by Applicants' proposed
improvements.
A7. While the roof design over the existing house may be changing slightly, Applicants are
not adding a second story. The proposed attached garage will have some low-headroom
storage above but will not constitute a story. Based on granting of the average setback
for the additions and remodeling, if the Applicants ultimately determined they need to do
a complete teardown, this variance would allow them to rebuild per the approved plans
without additional Council action.
Page 2 of6
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
6 6 0 G NO.----~---
A8. In considering this application for 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:
Bl. "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of the ordinance .... " Single family residences are a permitted use within the
RR-JB zoning district The intent of the average lakeshore setback ordinance is to
preserve lake views enjoyed by adjacent properly owners. No lake views enjoyed by
neighboring property owners will be impacted by granting of the variances.
B2. "Variances shall only be permitted... when the variances are consistent with the
comprehensive plan." The existing structure and proposed additions are associated
with residential use which is consistent with the comprehensive plan guiding of this
and surrounding properties for residential use.
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:
i. 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."
ii. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not
created by the landowner."
111. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality."
The property owner is proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner but the
specific location aspects of the request are not permitted by the Zoning Code. The
plight of the property owner is due to the location of the neighboring residence to the
immediate south which is unusually distant from the lakeshore, a condition not caused
by the applicants. The proposed additions will not alter the character of the
neighborhood but will be consistent with the neighborhood.
B4. "Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties." Economic
considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination.
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
Page 3 of6
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
6 6 O ~) NO. _________ _
defined in Minn. Stat.§ 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter
78." This condition is not applicable.
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, as the use for a single family residence is an
allowed use in the RR-JB District
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.
B8. "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such
property or immediately adjoining property." The condition of lakeshore lots being subject
to the average setback regulations is common to all lakeshore lots; the location of the
neighboring residence structure very distant fi·om the lakeshore is an unusual condition
affecting few other lots in the neighborhood.
B9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the
land is located." The standards applicable to this property apply to all other lakeshore
prope1ty in the neighborhood; the existing location of the neighboring residence structure
makes it impossible to expand the applicants' residence while meeting the conditions
imposed by the City ordinance.
B10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant." The prope1ty rights of the owner will be
diminished if the variance is denied, since expansion of the residence meeting all other
City code provisions could not occur.
B 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 of the
variance would not impair health, safety, comfort or morals and would be in keeping with
the intent of the zoning code.
B12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but
is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty." Granting of the variances will resolve .
and alleviate a demonstrated practical difficulty,
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a
variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279(6) in order to allow the Applicants
to remodel and construct additions to their existing residence, such additions being lakeward of
Page 4 of6
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
6 60 5 NO. _________ _
the defined average lakeshore setback line where no such encroachment is normally allowed ,
subject to the following conditions:
1. Council approval is based on the survey and site plans submitted by the Applicants and
annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B. Hardcover on the
property shall not exceed 25%. Any amendments to the approved survey or site plan
which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission
and City Council review.
2. Applicants shall comply with the permitting requirements of the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District.
3. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Owners, but are
permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the project and
commencing construction of said project within one year of the date of Council approval,
or the variances will expire on that date (April 11, 2017).
4. Violation of or non-compliance with any 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.
6. The undersigned Owners have read, understand and hereby agrees to the terms of this
resolution and on behalf of the Owners and the Owners ' heirs, successors and assigns,
hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the Property.
Adopted by th e Orono City Council on the 11th day of April, 2016.
ATTEST:
Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor
y Owner(s)
Page 5 of6
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
6 6 O 5 NO. _________ _
This instrument was acknowledged before me this 2 'l day of l}prt / , 20 l 6, by
Gregory G. Reitan, single.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
This instrument was acknowledged before me this:2-1 day of A,/)//~/ , 2016, by
Sally S. Neubauer, single. ~
WI~~
NotaryPublic
Page 6 of6
EXHIBIT A
Resolution No.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The following property within Hennepin County, Minnesota:
Resolution
Exhibit A
6 6 0 ~)
The North 152 feet of that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest~ of Section 27,
Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, descnbed as follows:
Beginning at a point on the East line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter distant
354. 75 feet North of the Southeast comer of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter;
thence North along said East line 635.25 feet; thence West parallel with the South line of said
Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter a distance of 990 feet; thence South parallel with
said East line 635.2S feet; thence East to the point of beginning.
....,
\
BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY FOR
GREGORY REITAN 6 6 O 5 .• §l
Oz !;5
2
;i;
~
'
IN TI-IE 5W.1!§.!)f ~ON 27-118-23
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
I "-,, ' l, I ·, / \ ', I '1' 33 I 33 I ,--< '-' I
,, " ,, ,, ---------·············· ······---... _1 I ' '--'-\ ' --, . I
\ \ ~-.-r~ ~ .,,.-">"==-----,-:::--::-,---i \ LIE PNW!E. WITH Ill~ \ ' I SCIITHLIECFSE1/4. '-.
SW1/4,SEC.21-11W3 ~\ \ .,
, ' ' , !ii I !! () \ \ -"'1·1111,_, "llt.-A;;...,,.....,~---t:---~ i SW114,SEC.27-11W3 • f~ \
LIEPNW!E.WITH ~ \ \\ '""-'..... • i I
••••••••• EASTI.IECFSE114. '"..L. \ I
....,.NW.I.El.WITH ~A \ _ r--:~~~;;~~~ i /
•••• SClTl1l UE'"' SE 1/4, I
~ r···-..
Resolution
ExhibitB
\_ SW1/4,SEC.27-11W3 I I
' ' .
1 v ~ ' , ~<:::::::::-::::::,~-----· r: : -; 1 ~ '
1
' ', ~,\_ {.°_::] I I · 1 <~ ~ ) I \ ,' ', \ ; \CJ < ~
'-I I '
,,> , u ( ( ---~E-·······.
I
---' --... ~·-., /
···--~E-' '/ I A ' ---~-_, ,-. I' ·• • ......,. -'
L_\J '---, ---------------------------------------------------------<: ;
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES SURVEYED:
The Nor1h 152 feet of that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 27,
Township 118 North, Range 23 West of Iha 5th Principal Mar1dlan, descr1bed as follows:
Beginning et a point on Iha East line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter
distant 354.75 feet North of the Soulhaast comer of said Southeast 0uar1er d the Southwest
Quarter; thence North along said East line 635.25 feel; thence West parallel with Iha South
nne of said Southeast Quarter of Iha Southwest Quarter a distanced 990 feel; 1hance South
parallel With said East line 635.25 feet; thence East ID the point of beginning.
This survey shows the boundaries and topography of the above described property, the location of
all existing buildings and other visible "hardcover" thereon, and the proposed location of proposed
additions. II does not purport to show any other Improvements or enaoact,ments.
• : Iron markerfound
• : lronmarkerset
__ , Existingcontournne
--l!E9--< Proposed contour line
liiil : Proposed spot elevation
' w
SOU!HUEOFSE1/4._ L ~ ENt 114, SEC.2M18-23 ·. i;
: z
---~2V-~-----····
RECEIVED
MAR 04 2016
CITY OF ORONO
....
(1)0 W5
~t oe , •·O!:!
fl)"'
fl) il
,( il
155 iu ww m~ Zi!i
0~ ffiu
t
~I~
~ ' I r
' t .. . ,
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )