Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout#3758 - variances , . . � O ' V O O � �e -, _ � � C ITY o� 4RON0 ti � �� t,~' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL �9kESH0g'� NO. � 'Z �, � A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9(D), SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9(E), AND SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6(B) FILE #2160 `VHEREAS, David A. Dotzenroth (hereinafter "the applicant") is o�vner of the property located at 3225 Casco Circle wzthin the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit A attached (hereinafter "the property"); and �'VHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(D) to allow the existin� detached garage plus the proposed additions to be located 0.2' from the street lot line where a 10' street setback would normally be required, and a variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(E) to allow the proposed 1,000 s.f. footprint building to be located at setbacks ranging from 0.2' to 9.3' from lot lines where a 15' setback from any lot line is required, and a variance to Section 10.25, Subdivision 6(B) to allow a side setback less than the required 10' for accessory structures in the LR-1C zone. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS l. This application was reviewed as Zoning File �2160. 2. The property is located in the LR-1C, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 19, 1996, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon and subject to the follo�vin� findings and conditions: A. The existin� garage is located as near as 0.2' to the street lot line and 4.4' to the side lot line. The proposed addition to the rear of the garage will range from 7.4' to 9.3' from the side lot line. Page 1 of 7 - �' �11�' - O O �-d -, i �ITY of ORONO � �„ ti -; �� �,'�' � RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL t9kESH��� NO. � � � H B. Applicant further proposes to reconstruct and construct a ne�i� roof over the existing gara?e and proposed addition, such necv roof being steeper in pitch than the existing roof, and portions of it constitutin� new structure in locations not meeting the required setbacks from the street and side property boundaries. �. The existing garaje doors open toward the street, making the existing garage nonconforming because a garage w-ith doors facing the street is required by code to be setback 30' from the street lot line. D. It would be inappropriate to construct the maa itude of additions proposed while continuing the direct access to the street (Casco Circle), which currently forces parking to occur ��ithin the street ri�ht-of-way �vhere such parking is generally discouraged or disallowed by Municipal Zoning Code Sections 8.20 and 10.61, Subdivisions 4 and 5. E. Applicant has agreed to eliminate the garage stall doors facing the street and has agreed to place such doors on the east side of the existing/proposed aarage structure, and to develop a driveway apron within the property boundaries to accommodate maneuvering and parking outside of the right-of-way. F. The proposed addition located as near as 7.4' from the side lot line will have no significant impact on neighboring property or on the neighborhood. Raising the pitch of the roof over the existing/proposed garage located only 0.2' from the street lot line and as near as 4.4' from the side lot line, �r�ill have no negative impact on the neighboring property o�vner or the neighborhood, since there aze other similarly situated detached garages in the neighborhood. G. Planning Commission finds that the reconfiguration of the garage stalls to enter the east side of the garage, and the concurrent construction of a new driveway/parking area to the east of the garage structure, �vill have minimal hardcover impact and �vill not cause a nonconfornun� hardcover problem, but will result in hardcover in the 75-250' zone at a level less than 20%, �vhere 2�% hardcover would be allowable. Pa�e 2 of 7 . � °� _ 0 0 � �b -, , � � C ITY of ORONO � � � � 'C�� ��,~' RESOLUTION OF T��15TY�COUNCIL 9kESHOg' NO. H. Planning Commission recommends that further parking within the right- of-way be discouraged by requiring that the applicant remove the existina concrete apron located �vithin the right-of-way of Casco Circle. 4. The City Council finds that there are a number of justifications for allo�ving the applicant to retain the existing stall doors and slab in their current configuration, and for not requiring their removal or relocation. These justitications include: A. Tree removal and tree damage would result from a new driveway apron within the lot boundaries east of the garage. B. Additional hardcover would be needed to develop such a driveway apron. C. Other garages in the neighborhood are situated similarly to applicant's existing garage. 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 variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 6. 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 applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hazdship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and �vould be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(D) to allow the existina detached garage plus the proposed additions to be located 0.2' from the street lot line where a 10' street Paoe 3 of 7 . � °� _ 0 0 s �ITY o� ORONO I � � � �� �p RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL �kESH�4 NO. � "�' � � setback would normally be required, and a variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(E) to allo�i- the proposed 1,000 s.f. footprint building to be located at setbacks ranging from .2' to 9.3' from lot lines where a 15' setback from any lot line is required, and a variance to Section 10.25, Subdivision 6(B) to allo�v a side setback less than the required 10' for accessory structures in the LR-1C zone, subject to the following conditions: 1. � Applicant shall reduce the size of the final garage structure including the addition such that the footprint does not exceed 1,000 s.f. 2. Reconstruction of the roof to create a higher pitched gable is approved subject to redesign resulting in no encroachment of the street lot line by the roof overhangs. 3. If applicant later determines that the superstructure of the existin� garage must be totally reconstructed, this application will require further revie�v by the City Council. 4. Applicant may retain the existing gara?e doors facing the road as well as the existin� driveway apron within the right-of-way. �. A building permit for the garage remodeling/addition shall not be issued by the City until exterior w�ork on the house pursuant to building permit #7225 is completed. 6. Authorities granted by this variance run �vith the property not with the applicant, 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 �vill expire on that date (September 9, 1997). 7. 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. Page 4 of 7 � e ' 7 O I O O �d - CI'�Y of 4RON0 � � ) �'C�'L, ��~' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL �kESH�g' NO. 3 '7 5 �3 8. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby ajrees 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. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of September, 1996. AT EST: � ,� � , ' � �"� � � / =G�.�r��-�� �- ������../; o thy M. al in, City Clerk Edward J. Call��ian, Jr., Mayor � I�� ' - ��l 1 �-..__ � � 1 Pro erty Owne s � STATE OF MII�rNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of September, 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 Citv. � .1 e. . JAMIE L.BOSMA ` . ;y�J. ?��`��' NOTARY PUBUC-MINNESOTA NOt3Ty UbI1C � •.'.�z..�' HEN�EPIN COUNTY •...••• My Comm�ssion FxDires J2n.31.2000 Page 5 of 7 • . � . /� O ' V O O �b -, C ITY of ORONO ,.� � ,,., ,I � �, � � ti / � � �,"�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ��kESH�4'� NO. e� "7 5 8 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this �1f day of � � � , 199� before me a Notary Public within and for said county,personally appe red �� - o� �c. � C�� � �7c-� : ,���� l:nown to me to be the person(s) descri d in a who executed the foregoing insf inent,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. =u:=;- .; JAMIE L.BOSMA , � NOTARYPUBUC-MINNE50TA ���� �Y�.�.- ��' HENIEPIN COUNTY ,'_•�:::'. m�ssion Ires,lan.31 200o NOTAR PUBLIC �Com �xa STATE 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 foregoin� instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199_ before me a Notary Public within and for said county,personally appeared l:nown to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledaed that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Pa�e 6 of 7 � � � `� J � EXHIBIT A � ►� �j, <.. RESOLUTION NO. � LEGAL DESCRIPTION All that part of Lot 28 , Spring Park , lyin� westerly of a line described as follows : Commencing at a point on the northerly line of said Lot 28 , distant �+5 • 5 �Pet seuthWesterly , measured along said northerly line from the northeasterly corner of said Lot 28 whicH corner is marked by a ,]udicisl landmark ; thence southerly along a straight line to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, said straight line passing through a point , marked by a ,judicial landmark , which is 9 feet westerly , measured at right angles , with the easterly line of said Lot 28 , from a point in said easterly line of said Lot 28 , distant 262 . 5 feet southerly from the northeasterly cor- ner of said Lot 28 ; also all of Lots 29 arid 30, together xith and includ- ing that part of Lake Shore Avenue , vacated , lying in said Lots 29 and 30 and in that part of said Lot 28 hereinbefore described , all in Spring Park, ,according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota , and the NorthWesterly corner of Lot 30 havin� been marked with a judicial land mark, and a further ,judicial land mark havin� been located on the West- erly line of Lot 30 at a point which is 21�9 . 2 feet southerly from the northxesterly corner thereof .