The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About#01-2722 Resolution 4733CITY of ORONO ~ . ~ '$,,.~< ~~~ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ~~~ NO. 47SR A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03 SUBDIVISION 9 (D); SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 13; SECTION 10.28 SUBDIVISION 5 (B); AND SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 15 (C) FILE NO. 01-2722 WHEREAS, Michael Brown and Monica Brown, (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 1241 Brown Road South within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lots 4 and 5, Block 1, Maxwells Addition Crystal Bay Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D), Section 10.03, Subdivision 13, and Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit construction of a 24' X 28' detached garage 1 O' from the side yard adjacent to the street (south) property line where a 50' setback is required, and 5' from the rear property line where a 10' setback is required; and to Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (C) to permit construction of a 6' fence 15' from the side yard adjacent to the street (south) property line, where a 3 ½' fence is permitted; 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 public hearings on October 15, 2001 and November 19, 2001, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #01-2722. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. Page 1 of 6 CITY of ORONO 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. Accessory buildings under 750 s.f. are permitted to be located 10' from the rear and north side property line. Since the applicant's property is a comer lot the required setback to each street property line is 50'. B. The garage would be constructed with the access doors facing the Minnetonka A venue property line. The proposed design would be ccmsistent with the current development pattern of other properties located along Minnetonka A venue. C. The proposed garage would be 28' X 24' and would have the doors facing the street to allow backing out to Minnetonka A venue rather than having to back out to the existing parking area. Across Minnetonka A venue are two detached garages that are built on the lots with direct access to the street. The closest garage, across the street is 12.5' from the paved surface of Minnetonka Avenue. A second garage is located 25' from the paved surface of the street. The proposed garage would be located 22.5' from the paved surface. D. The applicants have stated their hardship is the garage could not be moved further to the north due to a large pine tree being located behind the garage that they would like to keep on the property. Staff has measured the tree and confirmed it has a trunk diameter of approximately 16" and has a 30' diameter drip line. The tree is located 12' from the back wall of the existing garage. E. Nearly all garages built in the Crystal Bay neighborhood on comer lots have the garage with direct access, including the two lots across the street. One problem with the direct access is the fact the garages have very short driveways which do not accommodate off street parking very well. Adequate off street parking is not always available and Minnetonka A venue is a narrow road only paved 15' wide. Page 2 of 6 . • CITY of ORONO G. The lot is a 1/4 acre property located in a 2 acre zoning district requiring 50' setbacks for fences greater than 6' in height located adjacent to a street property lines. The property is a comer lot where construction of a 6' privacy fence would require the fence to be constructed over an area of the property where it could not provide screening for the back yard area of the house . 5. 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 grnnting 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 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 Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. 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. 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 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D), Section 10.03, Subdivision 13, and Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit construction of a 24' X 28' detached garage 10' from the side yard adjacent to the street (south) property line where 50' is required, and 5' from the rear property line where a 1 O' setback is required; and to Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (C) to permit construction of a 6' fence 15' from the side yard adjacent to the street (south) property line, where a 3 ½' fence is permitted subject to the following conditions: 1. The property shall be developed in conformance with the site plan attached hereto as Exhibit A. 2. The fence shall be constructed a minimum of 20' from the south property line to provide one (1) outdoor, on-site parking space in accordance with the attached site plan. Page 3 of 6 CITY of ORONO i,; . />-, ~ U--.\IHf/if'r. f-¥ ~< ~~~ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ~~ NO. 4'13;:$ 3. Authorities granted by the variances 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, or these variances will expire on that date (December 10, 2002). 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of the variances shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5. The undersigned owners have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, and hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 10th day of December, 2001. ATTEST: leris,-17 U~- Property Owners STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of December, 2001 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. ai~JL (1_~~ ~MM Q II No a Public Page 4 of 6 .')•i1!;;.. + e ALISSA A. WINTERNHEIMER NOTARY PU8UC • MINNESOTA My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2006 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. '? '.> V u \.) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this /t)."-11, · day of U.:!G?fYJDY' , 2OO_/ __ by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. DENISE M. LESKINEN NOTARY PUBUC. MINNESOTA My cam,ls1lon E,p1reS Jan. 31, 2005 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Notary Public On this _3_ day oC,)CLAv~"-1 , 20 62, \-.A~ c_kc-__J £, Bcow"--, V\a..m ed personally appeared before me, __ who is personally known to me .....---whose identity I proved on the basis of MN D l.. __ whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation-------~ a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/h · sTb~~~~~~~:a22a'<i.1 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Notary Public -~n On this "5 dayof V''{C1L~ ,2O0cr-, r',Jc:,n·1c0,__ personally appeared before me, :J __ who is personally known to me ---1.C_ whose identity I proved on the basis of i\~ 'N O L '?-:) vt \.\__\ I·"\ ~}1(\ IY i c,J I __ whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation ________ , a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. ~ RACHEL DODGE f >·<:'7 NOTARY PU2LIC • MINNE"OTA My Ccm:r.:s~;an Ex~ires J,1n. 3 i. 2COS Notary Public Page 5 of 6 .. .. Exhibit A 4·7 3 3 f E 134.00 ALLEY ······· ··. \ \ . \ \ \ ' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ' ' \ \ O' \ .. •·· .-'l~· ' \ \ \ \ \ ' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ t.l ~ . . . . ' \ \ ,ct) \~ \/1, ' \ ' ' ' ' ' \ -,;,'\ Page 6 of 6 ·. . :38.0· ········· .... ············· ' \ ' \ ' \ \ \ \ ' \ \ ' ' ' \ \ .- R=2897.97 l).=01°47' 25" L=90.55