The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutResolution 3737 � O� O O r � C ITY o� ORONO `p- . � � � �� G'�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL � �kESHOg' NO. •e� 7' `� '� A RESOLUTION GRANTING �" VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1, 10.28; SUBDIVISION 5(B); AND 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16(C) FILE #2145 WHEREAS, Donald Helgager and Robin Helgager, husband and wife, (hereinafter "tlie applicants") are owners of the property located at 3265 6th Avenue North within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: The west 327 feet of the east 542 feet of that part of Government Lot 1, lying south of the road, Section 29, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the Sth Principal � Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WI�REAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5(B) to allow a 5' side setback for construction of a new attached garage and room additions, where the required side setback is 30', and a variance to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1 and 10.56, Subdivision 16(C-6) to allow said additions to encroach the average lakeshore setback where no encroachment is normally allowed, and a variance to Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C) to a11ow new structure to be located 140' from Lake Classen, a Natural Environment Lake, where a 150' structure setback is no�nally required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: , FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2145. 2. The property is located in the RR-1B, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. � Page 1 of 6 � �� , � O� . • O O b. - CITY o� ORONO � � ��. �G'�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL . �kESH�St`' NO. � �' i� `x � 3. The Orono Plannuig Commission reviewed this application on June 17, 1996 and recommended approval of the proposed variances on a vote of 7 to 0 based upon the following findings: A. Since all proposed additions meet the 50' street setback, no street setback variance is required. B. The location of the proposed additions to the east of the existing house and as near as 5' to the east side lot line is appropriate based on the following unique findings: 1. Additions of the same magnitude as those proposed could not be . located elsewhere on the property without encroaching the 50' required street setback or the 150' required lakeshore setback. • 2. While the property is approximately 1.5 acres in dry buildable area above of the OHWL of Lake Classen, the buildable envelope due to the required setbacks is only 1,800 s.f. 3. If additions were constructed to the southwest or south of the house, they would eliminate the existing flat back yard area, � resulting in a steep slope directly behind the house. Given the proximity of County Road 6, it would be appropriate to retain a usable yard on the south side of the house. 4. Topography is generally sloping towards the applicants' property, hence any additional drainage near the lot line caused by the proposed additions will only impact the applicants, not the neighboring property oumer. 5. The proposed proximity to the lot line may have a negative impact on existing screening beiween applicants' house and the neighboring house to the east, however the neighboring property o�vner has indicated this is not a concern. • Page 2 of 6 � � O� • O O �b - CITY of ORONO � � ti '�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL �L`9$E p4ti�'G NO. e� "7 3 � � sx C. The average lakeshore setback for this application has been defined as the lake setback of the neighboring house to the east, since the neighboring property to the west is nearly one-quarter mile distant. The proposed removal of the existing garage and subsequent construction of a new attached garage and room additions will result in less encroachment of , the average lakeshore setback than currently exists. The existing encroachment is approximately 90', and this will reduce to 75'. The neighboring property will have no additional views encroached by the proposed construction, and may have additional views of the lake opened up by the proposal. D. The existing garage encroaches within 123' of the OHWL of Lake Classen. The proposal to remove that garage and construct new additions • which will encroach only as near as 140' from Lake Classen, is a positive improvement to the conformity of the property in relation to setback from Lake Classen. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 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 granting the variance 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 applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is 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. • Page 3 of 6 , ; � O� � O O �b. CITY of ORONO � � ��: ��'�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL . �kESH�4 NO. 3 "� � � CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5(B) to allow a 5' side setback where a 30' side setback is normally required, and grants variances to Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 . and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C-6) to allow a 75' encroachment of the average lakeshore setback where no encroachment is normally allowed, and grants a variance to Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) to allow a 140' setback from the OHWL of Lake Classen where a 150' setback is normally required, subject to the following conditions: l. Applicants shall adhere to the proposed plans submitted with Application #2145. 2. The existing detached garage struciure shall be removed prior to final inspection • of the new additions. 3. 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 approval, or this variance will expire on that date (June 24, 1997). 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. 5. 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 4 of 6 .� � O� � O O b. - CITY of ORONO � � ��: �G'�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL � �kESH�4 NO. � � � � Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of June, 1996. AT ST: �. ` i D r thy M. al in, City Clerk Edward J. Cal � an, Jr., Mayor I . � i ( � Property Owner(s) � f ; � . . i STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of June, 1996, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. ; ti� ,,.,, `:4�.L.''�n'`'" �� ,��°o; JAMIE L.BOSMA �'� `y NOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA �' '�'� ' HENNEPIN COUNTY ��-�•••'� My Cammission ExpiresJan.31,2000 NOtary F�u liC � , f • . I � I � • Page 5 of 6 ' i � <. , ., � O ' V • O O b. � CITY of ORONO � � �� G'�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL . � �kESH04� NO. � "� `� ''x STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this _� day of �, , 199�before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally ap ed ' r �,I� known to me to be the person(s) described in and who execute � e foregoing instrument,and , acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. c.�U:r..,.,...:C;=.�r�','.��.s�:`i yif..'.C':°�:5;��'s� � ;,' ..��-�".,. JANiIE L BOS�iA � � • • iVOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA � ' " •" ' HENNEPIN COUNN Q�'fLC..� •��MM��• (�yCommissionExpiresJan.31,200o NOT �R PUBLIC � STAT� OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. .. • COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) — ', On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared � known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and � acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. � . i ! NOTARY PUBLIC I STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) I On this day of , 199_before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared � known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and � acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. � � i NOTARY PUBLIC ; • Page 6 of 6 i I i ,