HomeMy WebLinkAbout#897 - denying plat - 1978 � , ... .:. ,.,.:. . .e..�,. y., �
r
, .,: `w�' n'44y
.3 ..y�' ...:;.. �'t ..k�..
' r �a' � ..�e'�J..,ti ;t � ��f: ��y'.�,• J �� t:` _ . 7'
. ,��`?i��' r,�s..'".,:a'��l._t,j c �,: fi,,'..
.... ��iSaYMl�i - ra a
i
Rcsolution cto. �97
;'', - - _...
^4� kE50LUTI0N UF THE CITY COUNC:►L DEt:YING �
�' TFiE PLAT SUBMITTED BY JOSt�PH EiRAUN
WH�REAS, the City Council of the City of Orono is
charged with the responsibility of controlling subdivi�ions
of land witt�in the City of Orono pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, 5462 in order to promote the yeneral health,
safety and welfare and to �'
harm within the cit P=event the creation of publfc
y, and
«NEREAS, Joseph Braun has applied for the subdivision
of land located within the City of Orono into two sep�rata
lots, each of which will bt su�standard according to the
zoning and platting ordinanees and comprehensiva plan of the
� City of Orono, j
i
NOW, THEREFORE, based u ��`'������� �
Planning Commission and staff,pandtafterChavingaheard andthe
�; �;
reviewed lengthy testimony and •:eports, the City Council of �^°`�""�
the City of Orono denies the requested subdivision and it '
any variance has been requested, the City Council denies th� (
variance based upon the following facts:
1. The original application for subdivision of the
land was made by Joseph Braun on February 25, 1974.
2. At that time the proposed lota did not m�et the
minimum lot width requirements i� that each lot was only SO
feet in width at the lakeshore.
. � .. `�.��Y:.�.
j��.
• 3. In order to approve a subdivision of this kype,
with two substandard lots as to lot width, Mr. Sraun should
have filed for a variance and no variancs was applied for at �
chat time.
4. The Zoning Administrator'c memo af Februaxy 13,
1975, noted probable soil problems and drainage probloma oa !
the proposed additional lot which should have been an�wtr�d b�`'` I
by the applicant. ,
5. The Planning Commisssion rev , I
March 17, 1975, and did not call a publicehaaringrforsciti�en
information or particfpation.
6. The City Council on March 25, 1975, approved tbe
preliminary plat conditioned upon th• payment of 5580 water �����
unit assessment, which esseasment has nev�t been paid by
;�
�:
}-�`' . . .. � .
�'. .. � , ' .. .�:n.. ..
. k
. . . ..--.f. .. .,�vw,m. ..�,�,�... ,
~•F.
":;Y
��:,.
. ;, . k. , :, �
,._ --
: ,, r . ,. . ;...
_ . .. ,, . , . . . , f. .,.,
,, , : �y.N � " � �:,, _.
. � ��.�'���, r�..� ,1.
j
.
�
��..
the ��pljcdnt and conditioned upon the completion of the
final plat and othc,r pterequisit�s of final plst approval.
7. On May 7, 1976, the then building inspe�ior, Alan
Otson, R,et on the site with Mr.
�-: inspector's report shows that therewwas anne@d8forisoil9test-
� ing and drainage problem investigation prior to any tinal
_� action.
f�;�
8. On or shortly before June 17, 1976, the city
��: received the mylars and hardshell drawings for final plat
;; approval. The drawings were dated �
;':� submitted to the city over one ` ^ril 12, 1976, and vere
� plat approval on March 25, 1975yea : after the preliminary
�;
�y' 9. The Planning Commission reviewe
f� on June 21 , d the final plat
s"�t the Cit En ineer Sna recommended approval ,conditioned upon
'�' y 9 ' pproval of the drainage plan and upon
�� receipt of the park dedication fPe and the other prerequisites
±'x of the final plat.
G.:y"
t;;:
��;` 10• No variance had been applied for still at thi�
aN'` ofiatvariance�during thessubdivision rroce�ed the granting
,� P s.
;:
'P,h 11. On June 28, 1976, the City Council a
•}; final plat for Joseph Braun subject to the CitypEngineerhs
� approval of the drainage plans, which were not aub�oitt�d to
�`� the cit
�.,, y until January, 1978, almost three years after th•
:- initial application and one and one-half years aft�r the
������� contingent approval of the City Council on June 28, 1976,
�' and contingent upon the other
approval. Prereguiaitea ot final plat
►
. 12• On October 26, 1976, Steve Plowman applied for a
building permit on the proposed additionsl lot, which appli-
cation was held without approval due to th� la�k ot drafnag!
�, plans and the lack of final subdivision �ompleLion and
approval.
�?;: 13• On August 24, 1977, almost one y�ar aft�r the
application for a buildfng permit, the plan� held by tAt
��;' city for the building permit were desttoyed due to the lack
of interest or cqntact from Mr. Plowman or Mr. Braun.
i�
14 . On October 17, 1977, the city received a lettet
from Mr. Braun requesting reapproval of the �ubdivision
request "whic:h was acted upon at the City Cou�cil meeting of
March 25, 1975," thereby indicating his knowledy� of th� lack �
of subdivision completion after two and one-half `
years. '
xr
w:
;',;�
-2-
f
�`
;
�,y� �
� �;�, �
��;�� � .Y, .�-
r
, ��:r� �. ,
, _ .", . .;
, .: ; ..a. .,.. . _, .
: �.__�,
k:, � �, .,,:. ��,,, , :
y;�.�,
x 15. On Octob�r 24, 1977, the City Cauncil determined
chat the final plat was never completed a�cording to the �oa-
ditions of prior approval, that thare had been sub�ta�ti�l
^har�ges in subdivision procedure and zoning code interpreta-
tior,s and the irr,plementation of the cort�pr�hensive l.and use plaa
for the city, since the original application, that apparently
the Planning Commission and City Council before may have over-
looked the fact that variances were required foc both lots,
that varir�nces had not been applied for by anyone for both
lots, and that other issues that had been raised by the
Planning Commission and City Council had not been remolv�d �
by the applicant, and that therefore the Planning Co�amissioa. -���
should review the proposal as a preliminary plat applict�tion. ,�r,ft.:
16. On October 28, 1977, the city received a letter ,
from Mr. Plowman wherein he admitted being told several times
by the city personnel that there were outstanding requirements
to be completed prior to final plat approvhl and approval of
the proposed bui�ding site.
17. On January 16, 1978, the Planning Commission held �
�t the first public hearing on the proposed subdivision and
received letters of objection from neighboring property owners
' to any proposed variances to be granted.
18. After closing the public hearing, the Planning
Commission recommended denial of the subdivision because of
the 508 variance required for the lakeshore lot width, wbich
variance had never been applied for a�d which variance v+ould
reduce an existing conforming lot width ot 100 feet to two
non-conforming lot widths of 50 feet, all in violation of the
zoning code, �.I �tting ordinance and the Orono Comprebensive
Plan.
19. On February 6, 1978, a review ot the proposad �
• subdivision by the City Engineer indicated that there would ��.
be a need for drainage easements which have nerver be�n �hown
� on the mylars or on the hardshella anci that th�re was a csur►e �
for concern about the lakeshore and drainageway ailtation and
sedimentation problem, and that there Was a ba4ic eoncer�
about the suitability of the site for residential use� due
to the extcemely poor soil bearing conditions a�d restric�ivt
�-` methods necessary to overcome same.
���.
20. Throughout the three years that this propo�al had
.'� been before the city, the applicant had repeatedly failed to
�` proceed to completion despite requests by the eity to do so.
„:j1
' 21. 7hera ara serious questions of suitability ot the
;`' site for proposed residential use because e! the soil �ypes
and drainage problems.
'�Y +t ��'�_,�
.. � :��,�,.
.� �3� .,x ,�., y;.
'i' �� �
. x4s /�,•`,
;�.'����"���`9`.'���.`�r�'
i` �a
�.. �r-t*�s7�
r' i '.�_
., f';'.c�� ...
' '�s'4�,
� r:,, �
�t���� � '��' .
�`�
� �
4 j, �,,v �^��
��`r,�` t�' . . r,�
,
� ' '•' ,.���;��;_> t i;r,n curing this pc'occ•s3, ;Kr. Breun pur-
�.�orLcd to sell the proposed lot to Mr. Plowman vta d rontreck
for dAed. This ��,hai��sion af the land by �ontrs�t tor deed
has nerer been approv�d by the city and, therefore, is not a
legal transfer of land since tt was prior to the final f!]inc�
of t�ny pl�t for t�� r. ��,�nr*v r��r��.a-+nP- rn Minnrro+o �:r,�r�it�r�,
SS462 and 505. �
23. The ;�, ,,^�, ;- , , , ._,�� ;-:> ie t��r��.ic?es t;��t ��11 propost�d
l�ts in the proposed subdivision shall meet the followfng
minimum requirements in the LR-IC-Us� District in which �
this land is located:
A. 34.552 lots. The folloaing m�nimum requirementa 4�
shall be ob�erved.
Lot Area. One-half acre. . �;,.- `
�s ti� _
S �
Lot Width. 100 feet. ��� ��,
—— ,`.,
'�;� , :� t�;f
Front Yard. 30 feet -;h, � ;`>� a,
Side Yard. 10 feet � � � � ���°������ ���' '�` �
�:
Rear Yard. 30 feet
Side Yard Ad acent to Street. 15 feet. „x �.
--_._._-------j--___.___ _--_ __.__ . �,
{�� �
,�� a`��;�
� .;,w *.
�,�; » -
30.Od0. �._
.;;
,
�:
Lot width. The maximum horisontal distanc� betwe�n th�
side lot��nes of a lot measured parallel to the front lot
line and at the rear of the required front yacd.
Lot Line. The property line bounding a lot sxcept �ha�
where any port on of a lot extenda into the public righL-of-
r+ay or a proposed publir rtght-of-way, the line of such pub13C
right-of-way shall be the lot line.
Yard. A required open space orf a lot� which i• unoN
cupied an�unobstructed by s atructure from it• lowtrt qround
level to the sky except as �xpreesly permitted in th� �oninq
Cod�. A yard Rhall extend along a lot line end et ri9ht anq2es
to such lot line to e depth or width apecified in tht yard
r�guletiona for the district in which •u�h lot i• lOc�t�d. ,�
Yard - Front. 11 yerd extendiny alonq th• lull width
of the �ront�+Io��-�1-i'ne b�tween the side lot lints end •xtandinq
from the abutting tront �tre�t right-of-wey to a d�pth r�Quir�d
_4_
r '�{` y 'v`:
: �
�
S.
� j i vr
€f
r.�Y ��j',,
:n c:,e y,�rd regulation� for tha di�trict in which such lot
i:_ 1 ;�r
;c.�r.cd. �,
;..
,;;�:
3] .410 �� � = � `� w-'�,a>,���,.
--- -- � �
_._ • , �.,�,„�;
Raduction Pr�nibited. No y�rd ar okher open 'space �� � � �
.__.�..._._.. ,.:x�
�hall be reduced in areas or dimvnsions Ro es to r�akt �uch � �'`�,��::
yard or other open spaca leas than ths minimum rsquirtd by - �`�'J
tt�e Zonin Code and if the existin �'���
9 g yard c�r other spaca as �;
existing is lesa thr,n the mfnimum required, it shall not bs ' . �� �4,:-
further reduced.
.. h+�, f;`.
24. The front yard in the lakeshore property as decided �t r
by the Minnesota Supreme Court iri the case of Girvan v. _C__o_un�t� Y� s'���,
of LeSueur, 232 N.W.2d 888 (1975) and a� applied by th�r City- �'� f '��`
o�Ocono, �is the yard adjacent to the lake. :° ,�
. '�'
�,�;
25. The proposed subdfvision, if approved, wQuld result
in two substandard lots abutting on Casco Cove. Eacb lot musk
have a mini�um lakeshore frontage width of 100 feet. Tb�t pro-, ` � ��h�^
posed lots have only 50 feet of lakeshore frontage. The
Planning Commission and City Council require that tber+a be "` ?"�"
100 feet of lot width at both the building location and tbe �����
lakeshore. Otber subdivfders have beeo danied variances to ��� "`
reduce the number of feet from the minimum on the lAkeshore ; �s`��..
in a manner similar to Mr. Sraun's application.
26. Variances may only be granted to the above requla-
tians only pursuant to 532.300 through 32.371 0� tbo Orono
� --<<,�:;
Zoning Code.
u�`-.
27. Mr. Braun has not applied for any of the above ' , �
variances. Even if Mr. Braun had applied for the vAriances �-
or is deemed to have applied for the above variancea, the
. variances are denied for the reasons set forth herein: ;�,,gj�
(1) The granting of the variance� would adveraaly
affect the purpose and intent of the Zoning Coda snd the wtl- -
fare of the public.
(2) T�ere has been no request for varianca�t r�ferr�d �
to the Planning Commfssion nor has there be�n a waiv�r o! tbt
requirement that the Planning Commission review any proposed
variances pursuant to S3Z.330.
(3) The Planning Commission after nR.ing heard all o� ' -
� the testimony and reviewed the staft reports, has racoa�tnd�d �, �,
denial of the proposed aubdivision and any variaaC�; if ope, ::
i s appl ied for. 5�=t��° `
,���r � . ��� •;�
•. ,�,x.;�k
�i.n
, s�,�
.=;k k ' "�; ���v�,.
M a #,f�
k�5
��� ����� ��
����;� � �.. .
m ��i r�ar '� T �'� .
� �� �. s a
S�h���#d� a
+ � 1
'� q'� ..���rv=f.� .�
Wl r� '� � E£�. ":
. . ��s�'., a^;�F
i
� ' . a �����:ta Y"'
� � .� ���
��� ���` � w� . ..
. S`•Y�+ A �7a �}� ,-1
-'yh b �k.j1(,�,
, �� ��
=Y'.ti.
..�,^t �'�+.�'�"S
.. � ia';'� :`�. ..
,� . .^y;a .�a`a�:.
��.
. .�.'�^�.����... .
�; �, � '* r �'a:; - i `r1
` .
{ •
�.
- .:t . f m �„ �:, �
- `s'-' $��z}gsarl,s, ..
� �.5� "t)�'.. ;
�r s ��� i
t4 ) The City Council cannot make any of the lindinqs
� of fact requircd by 532.340 of thQ Zoning Code tv warrant the �
,a oranting of a variance and spe�ifically finds a� follows in �
�;
regard to 532.340:
� ;���� t
A. There are no special conditions a `
structure or land in PP1Y�nq to tbe ;���'
property or immediateluestion which are peculiar to such
Y joining propertY1 and
8• The conditions which the applicant or someone e2se
may argue are unigue, are not unique and apply generally to
other land or structures in the district in which the land
is locatedj and �
::y�u'
�. The granting of the variance is �ot necessary foc
tl�e preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property rcigbt
of the npplicantt
D. The granting of the proposed variance will impair
health, safety, comfort, morals, and would be cantra�cy to the
F intent of the 2oning CodeT and
E• The granting of �uch varia�ce will mer�ly s�rvs as
a convenience to the applicant an�! is not necessary to alla-
viate demonstrable hardship or difficulty.
28• The City Council further find� that the granting
of a variance would result ins
A• Fcrther traffic co�gestion on a narrow substandard
residential curving, dead-�end roadway.
8. The diminution in value ot aurrounding properties
which were constructed in reliance upon tbe Comprebensive
Land Use Plan, the performance standard� ot the Zoning Code
;;, ,.,,
• and Subdivision Ordinance. ' `''
� C. Allowing for additional boata to D• plac�d on Cssco
Cove which is silted in a2ready, with one narrow char�n�l out-
let and which is already congested with boats and boat LraftiC
from other lots abutking on Casco Covo.
D• 11�ro lots with lakeshore widths ot only 50 te�t.
which is far less than the widths ot other lots similarly
situated in the area.
29. The Subdivision Ordinance requir�s that all pro-
posed lots meet the minimum r�quir�m�nts ot' th� :oainy Code
unless a variance is grented. Pursuant to s39.1�p it ie
the requirement,� of the Subdivision Ordinanc� that�residtntial
-6- , ' ��a
'��,. �'
� � :' �- :
�:� � �� t}�b � � ������p�? y��
.r . : {iy+�7�% C N¢f
S .. �' �P� C"�AM�������
��
N ,'}
}':M,w'� 5 J.")r°�:1�'.:'�� . 1�, .
f
' v�L t i d'#`.
..,..iM,.+,r+,�..'
,} ` ' ', r���' � b�,-r=-. . I� '• �
, g, w.
. , � � . ., . , _, . „ .
. .. . . _ .
- , . . :
,..
,��.-> _ . ,
�'�
..yr �'*y
� , •
�
� � . - " - , o k x�� ���` `*�"'� ���A'���,.a.�,
f�� d'��"�` , '� ry�';��f��
lots as to �ize and area be ��� `
policy of the City Council in�orderdtoY and :ubject to the
Welfare, sanitation and the like of thcpn�ighborboodeandhall
pr000sed lots should conform in axea to the existing lots in
the minimum buildingtlotpb�posed subdivision and conforw ko
Code. Ze$ established by the Zoning
30. The ��� �
proposed lots do not meet the rainimum require- ,��� '
ments of the Zonfng Code. � ,
i �
31. The proposed lots do not conform �
existing lot and existing lots in the area. 9enerally to the ,�;�.4 :
purportedly is a contract for deed vendee in arcontractnforh�
deed from Mr. Braun, has ar u�+ �
approved previously and thereforehany�required variance wasn
aPproved by such action. Mr. Plowman's argument fafls for '
each of the following reasonss • �
A• It fs the city's long-established � "' `'
final plat which has not been filed within on�licy Chat an ' � ��t ��
Y �.�� �. :�,-� ,
Office of the Hennepin County Recorder is void andrtha�subdf- ' �� t
vider must reapply under all existing ordinance�, regulations 1
{
an policies. This reguirement has been applied to numerou�
subdividers prior to Mr. Braun. �
�
8• 1�r�Y variance whicb may have been
within one year after the a 9ranted expirts �
Orono 2oning Code which pproval pursuant to 532.371 0! tbe � �
providess ! s
"Variances shall expire one �:�
date of council a year after ths :.,���
change in use of the�V�l it not used. 11ny �
a new variance.• Property shall requir� �x�• ��� �
, ,
' C. No separate variance application has b��n fi2ed by
Mr. Braun or by anyone else for thia
City Council may not approve of one atrthisttim�a th�retore tb�
32. The reascns for an �
bY Mr• Plowman and Mr. eraun= y prior delay wers as admittad
A• The two of them could not agree ac to who vould �
the park dedication fee, the water assessment, the cost of sur- , `
VeYs► the soil borings, and other costs incidental to the 1
subdivieion procedure.
:�;�����
8• Mr. Plowman signed a contract for deed for tht prp.. �'i��
poBed lot in 1975, prior to tht final lat a
to the filing of a record plat with th� Ofiic�rotatihe�H�nngor �
pin
��� �,,fi•,,� .
-7- + �. `�����`..
. . . �,,.,�� r
. .b . . , :.� .
� .,. .�;...t
I�.
,am6'"I
�° . .�.s �'6'N?r�'7. 4f .•i�jl'� I� � i
� .. � � . . , .. �` kr t'L�.$5�'� .,v�=� ' ' i
�
�', '�'��'i^,y 4'k .�.u r 1
� �. f s�� } �� r ^ 14y � . I
P� {� ��r alj a � ��:.
' i i4 ��1tl �',rA'1t�t - h.
<.� `��e�����*,�", �A� �a� �
. ',y.�.
r;:a
`7f'
,. ::
,.
.
� ,.:.. ��
�ti.,_ �, �
;F ., ,,:�..
.., _..� .�
.,,,._:_
„ �
,, ,. � ,,. � . , ..
k,r .��� >`Y�;.
f�
��
qAti�tr:ti . ' . . ... . . . . .
Y
x' .
S� 'g .
��'V} p�4,#i���.,} -p.^�j����.
County Recorder. ' �'��L �t ��
The signing of the conkrect tor dead {
to final city approval and filing ot the rtcord o� platp�was
in violation of Orono'� Subdiviaion Ordinance and State Lavs
Chapters 462 bnd 505. Mr. �
the property is thPcefore aflnomleg�lPef��tei R
Orono Zoning anci Subdivision Ordinances pur��eS� �f
n regar0 to tht �;�
4..� • . , . .� .
� The above resolution was reviewed Aqc� a �'
�, :
� da of �:�_ Ppxoved on tht
Co-un i l by a vote rc��'-----' 1978� bY th� Orono City
__ ayes and 0 nay8.
�s� Councilmembers voting for a
� pproval:
"^'� t ,:;�.�,
� V�/
Councilmembers voting against e� � � �
�; pproval t ,�`,,,„��
f . - `.�'"�y."?:
Yi
1 , �y.
��� � , �a:;
�F wl 1 am B. Van �
Mayor e�t,
� ATTEST:
�":
E`- � ' ,�:�,...
� � � � �� �°'
M �y� dy
yi,.` J ���Y��V�' •�,y 4+�i�=4 v 4t_.
W81 t! � �u��
r R �.�. �� � ,,:�'
. � . S _ � � � �
' Clerk/Adm' istrator '� "
_ �,�;a�at.
t
i �...�
, �"�'�'.
� �ar .
`.+ ' � r a, r,r .
.. � . :..Yti�:" �.r-^.,v5�.;�4 r .
i
� � j,:
. :F:' t`�}.. •
�v, �
.- (t, �' ti��,,,� � t x '� r4 "
� � �.. ���-.
.P���
�
a'T.Y��.��3.:
*� �k�
. . �..pF ^T r.�j;•R�i.
. r(e���. ��.INi
ti.f ��.
. � �,. r.. .,
.���+ �
'� t x` de 'r� ,�:
• pt`i "'� ',�k�r��'�+� � *�'�
.. �.. �e 4. E�v�A +� -1�f.W
Rv�.. 4 I�L �+4'�d
. , .. �'., s �i�`3#t;..,'�,%
f`v.- � � � ,�s. �
a-
r ;�":
.� `$�
:, ��. '
;... 3 �. =x���',� k��.���.i"�G,�E'�
nM a ,�
> �r
., ... °"w���� r !. .
,y,
s� ,:,r�� '
+^k
rx� �; ,
�a."';: .