HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 2182 ._ __ _
__. _ _
b
, .. ''
., �
� - � cit� o� oR,oNo
� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
� NO. 2182
�
' : • � • • �
A RESOLDTION DENYING t'
VARIANCES TO
MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE ��.
SSCTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 & 2
AND SECTION 10.55, SQBDIVISION 8
FILE #1117
WHEREAS, Willard C. Shull (hereinaf�er "the applicant") is the
owner of the property located at 1125 Spring Hill Road within the City of
Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows:
That part of Government Lot 2, Section 26, Township 118 North, Range
23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, lying Northerly of creek and
Westerly of the following-described line and its Southerly extension:
Commencing at the Northwest corner of the Southeast quarter of
said Section 26 ; thence on an assume bearing of South 1° 03' 45"
West along the West line of said Southeast quarter a distance of
1168 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described;
thence South 45° East a distance of 569.03 feet; thence South 54°
35' East to the East line of the West 619 feet of said Government
• Lot 2; thence South 1° 03' 45" West a distance of 304.38 feet;
thence South 11° 30 ' East to the Southerly line of said
Government Lot 2, and there ending,
EXCEPT that part thereof lying Northerly of the "Survey line" of
Hennepin County State Aid Highway Number 6, Plat 5, as delineated in
Book 3, Page 1 of Highway Plats as recorded in the office of County '
Recorder, (hereinafter "the property" ) ; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to
Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 & 2 and Section 10.55,
Subdivision 8 to allow the installation of a residential boat ramp to store
one boat under 25 feet in length within 20 feet of the shoreline of Long
Lake where no temporary structure and/or hardcover is allowed within 75
feet of the shoreline; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of Orono (hereinafter "Council") has
considered this application including the findings of the Planning
Commission, reports by City staff and comments of the applicant.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono,
Minnesota hereby denies the variance application of Willard C. Shull as
proposed based on one or more of the following findings:
FINDINGS
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1117.
• Page 1 of 5 �
� Cit� o� ORONO
• • RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCI L
� NO. 2182
�
' • • • •
2. The property is located in the LR-lA Single Family Lakeshore
Residential Zoning District and subject to the standards that govern
the development and use of all lakeshore properties.
3. The property consists of approximately seven (7) acres in area and
contains 300 feet of shoreline along the northern boundary of Long
Lake.
4. Approximately half of the shoreline, 150 feet of shoreline, is
defined as a designated wetlands area. The previous owner, in a
subdivision involving the property, granted to the City of Orono a
flowage and conservation easement placing restrictions and/or
prohibitions on the use of this wetlands area.
5. The drainageway f lowing from Wolsfeld Lake, northwest of the
property, enters Long Lake just to the west of the property bringing
sand, sediment, and varieties of algaes and seeds or spores of other
acquatic vegetation.
• 6. The applicant sought to install a temporary track structure fifty
feet in length, 20 feet of which would be located on the land and the
remaining 30 feet of track submerged under water. The 20 feet section
of track would hold a single boat approximately 22 feet in length. As
noted in Finding #21, this is now indicated to include concrete pads
for support.
7. Thomas Crosby, Jr., the applicant's attorney, in a letter dated
May 5, 1987, refers to "concrete footings in the form of "pads" must
be prepared on shore." It was Council's understanding that there
would be no permanent hardcover on the land and that the track would
be placed on top of existing ground cover and lake bottom.
8. The applicant seeks the use of this temporary structure in order
to store his boat out of the water, so the boat is not subject to the
activity of the wind and vegetation.
9. In addition, the applicant indicated that the lakebed is unstable
and a seasonal dock of ordinary construction cannot support the
demands of a boat lift. .
10. In the summer of 1986, the Council reviewed the use of ramp like
structures along the shoreline of this City that housed varied sized
boats because of complaints from residents. The Council directed that
these structures were not in conformance with the setback and
• hardcover regulations of shoreline properties:
a ) Per Section 10.22 , Subdivision 1 and Section 10.55 ,
Subdivision 8, no temporary or permanent structures are allowed
within 75 feet of the shoreline.
Page 2 of 5
� C�t� o� ORONO
• RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
�,� NO. 2182
i,!t�'
' • - • •
b) Per Section 10.22, Subdivision 2, no hardcover is allowed
within 75 feet of the shoreline.
11. As part of that same policy, Council would consider each request
for new construction of a ramp with the required setback and hardcover
variance review. It would be the applicant's responsibility to
provide reasonable acceptable hardships. The Council did not feel the
hardship of heavy vegetation acceptable because by storing the boat on
land, the applicant's maintenance and/or cleaning chores would be
reduced.
12. On April 13, 1987, Council directed staff to provide additional
information citing examples of hardships, standards and necessary
findings. The following list of reasons was presented for Council's
consideration as to why track systems are used:
A. A unique condition of the lakebed:
• 1) Mucky, soft, unstable bottom does not provide adequate
support for boat lift at seasonal dock;
2) Presence of bank rats/muskrats;
3 ) Lakeshores affected by drainageways.
B. Steep topography - land storage of boat for protection.
C. Narrow width of lot at shoreline or along a narrow channel
area may suggest need to store boat on land.
13. Council did not find a "mucky" bottom with heavy vegetation a
unique condition to warrant being classified as a hardship. This type
of bottom is not rare but is found predominately along the west and
northern shoreline of Long Lake and in places along the shores of Lake
Minnetonka. �
14. Many boat. owners within the City store their boats in such
waters.
15. The owner indicated that the reason for seeking storage out of
the water was the additional maintenance and cleanup of the boat
related to in-water storage. This is not deemed a hardship that can
• be recognized by this Council and to grant variances for the
convenience of individuals would be in conf lict with the true intent
of the zoning code and establish a negative precedent in the review of
future variance applications.
Page 3 of 5
� Clt� o� ORONO
• RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
�,� NO. 2182
tJl�
' • - • •
16. The Council would ask the applicant to employ other alternatives
to deal with possible problems related to vegetation.
17. The applicant wishes to store his boat out of the water because
of the potential of damage created by wave action. Council can
appreciate this concern especially on Long Lake given its size and
level of boating activities. As with Lake Minn.etonka, Council
recommends increasing the number of ties used to secure boat in
addition to designing the slip such that ties can be installed on
three sides, slip structure to be provided with "cushioning" like
protection.
18. Mr. Crosby, in the letter referenced in Finding #7 dated May 5,
1987, responds to concerns involving the Council's policy/procedure in
dealing with similar structures that exist throughout the Orono
community. Crosby states in denying the Shull variance application
for a boat ramp and allowing other similar structures to remain would
appear to be selective enforcement of the City's ordinances.
• 19. In 1985, the Council adopted a similar policy in dealing with the
issue of the storage of boats in excess of the al lowed 20 feet length
on residential properties. The Council responded to neighbors'
complaints and denied a variance application that sought to al low an
applicant to store a boat 30 feet in length in a side/street yard area
(Resolution No. 1749 - Application No. 884). Staff was directed to
deal with each case uporr complaint of affected neighbor, and to
request a variance application if resident was not a'�le to meet boat
storage standards for residential property.
20. The City of Orono has never approved a variance for a residential
boat ramp. The Shull application would be the first such
application.
21. The situation of the landowner is not recognized by the Council
as unique to this property as varying intensities of lakebed
vegetation exist throughout the shoreline areas of the City.
22. Economic considerations shal 1 not constitute an undue hardship if
other reasonable measures of boat storage are available.
23. In denying this variance application, the City is not depriving
the applicant of the continued enjoyment and preservation of a
substantial property right. Navigational access to the property is
not inhibited with this .denial. �
; • 24. The reasons as presented by the applicant are not considered
hardships within the standards set forth in the Municipal Code to
warrant approval of this variance request and, if approved as
proposed, the City would be responding on the basis of a convenience
to the applicant.
Page 4 of 5
C . � . . . " . ' . � ' . .
c�t� o� oR,oNO . . . . . .
• ��, : . .. . __
,-,.;'':� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 2182
•,�
' • � • •
25. Council invites the applicant to present further documentation to
� support the applicant's claims that would constitute a hardship to
��'�ustify granting variances for installation of the track system in the
- � lakeshore protected area. Council cannot approve this variance
application as proposed by the applic,ant because of the negative
precedent Council would establish in the consideration of other
similar applications in the future. Council must ask that the
applicant seek out other methods to store boat that would not be in
conf lict with the ordinances of the City.
Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 26th day of May, 1987.
ATTEST:
•
�
rothy . Hallin, City Clerk Jame R. Grabe , ayor
� __ _ _ -- _ __ _ -_
_ _
_ : Page 5 of 5