HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 2463 �
. . .. . ,
,t:� d � Cit o� ORONO
.?.:: �'
• ���� �
�,Yk�� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
:�.� :..
� NO. 2463
• - • � ,
A FtESOLIITION GRANTING
A VARIANCE TO
MIINICZPAL ZONING COD$
SBCTIONS 10.22, SIIBDIVISION 1 & 2
10.55, SDBDIVISION 8, �
AND 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (A) & (B) �
FILE #1275
WHSR�:AS. Douglas Johnson (hereinafter "the applicant") is the .
owner of the property located at 1399 Park Drive within the City of Orono
(hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows:
Exhibit A, attached, (hereinafter "the property"); and
WH$RBAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to
Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1 & 2; 10.55, Subdivision
S; and 10.24, Subdivision 5 (A) & (B) for approval of the following
variances:
• A) Hardcover in the 0-75' zone of 4.9$ where no hardcover is normal�ly
allowed.
� B) Defined building height of 31' where a 30' maximum building is
normally required.
C) Encraachment nearer the lakeshore than the defined average
lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is normally allowed.
D) Structure located in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone where no
structure is normally allowed.
,
E) Construction of additional stories above a portion of existing
house which is located 1.8' from the side lot line where a 10' side
setback is normally required.
NOW, THBR$FORE, .; B� IT RESOI.V$D by the City Council of Orono,
Minnesota:
S'
:� FINDINGS
:� 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1275.
2. The property is located in the LR-1B Single Family Lakeshore
� Residential Zoning District.
} • 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 6,
` 1988, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the
F;
4 fol lowing findings:
�� ,
a � Page 1 Of 5
� a
:�,
,,;
�����
���,��d Clt� O� OR�N�
• ��� �¢�
r,,,r„� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
�3 "
'.;`�,�. NO. 2463
.
,.:.�.:. ti.1Y
- • ' • •
;,.,
A) The existing and proposed hardcover percentages in the 75-
250 ' and 250-500' lakeshore setback zones are within the
allowable 25$ and 30� respective limits. In conjunction with
additions to the house, applicant proposes to reconstruct decks
� which will be located within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone due
to the location of the existing north wall of the house being
nearly coincident w3th the 75' setback line. The applicant has
. removed� a non-conforming shecl structure previously located in the
0-75' zone as part of his upgrade of the property. The new deck
. and steps total 274 s.f. or 4.9� hardcover, where originally 6.9$
hardcover existed. This net hardcover decrease in conjunction
with the con£orming hardcover percentages in the zones further
" from the lake put this proposal in a positive light.
B) The 1' variance requested to building height wil 1 have little
or no significant effect on the visual appearance of the proposed
; house, and the house will not be visually obtrusive. because of
i its relationship to its existing topography.
_, • C) The proposed additions to the existing house technically
require a variance for. encroachment past the average lakeshore
• � setback line. However, although the neighboring houses are
� setback much further from the lake than the proposed
construction, those neighboring houses are also much higher in
� elevation, hence their existing views of the lake will not be
i significantly encroached upon by the proposed construction.
.-i Additionally, the property from the east is well screened from
� the proposed construction by existing vegetation.
�� D) The applicant is proposing to construct additional structure
�# above a portion of the existing house which encroaches within
�� 1.8' of the side lot line. Lateral additions to the existing
s structure will be located to meet the 10' side setback
s requirement of the LR-1B district. The applicant can construct
' � proper overhangs to the upward additioa so that there will be no
'.3 encroachment into the neighboring property. There is adequate
setback from other structures on the neighhoring property so that
� fire access to this side of the house is not a problem.
: � E) The applicant will continue to use the existing detached
'� garage which is located near the road and significantly higher in
' ;� elevation than the existing house.
,., ,
Page 2 of 5
��� •
:�
� F
.•. 'ii.
•'�. ,
;�, .
-yry. .
.f• r1
�`j
�.l�i
?,.
� �
' e
�:���r d � ��� Cit o� ORONO
�:���.._ _ �'
• � . � :,:
`°`�� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
�� �
��?`,;:;.;.,� NO. 2 4 6 3
��Y-
^�y�;.:.�- • • .
4. The City Councii 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.
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 applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demon-
strable 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.
CONCLIISIONS, ORDSR AND CONDITIONS �
• Based upon one or more of the findings notecl above, the Orono
i City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections
� 10.22, Subdivision 1 & 2; 10.55, Subdivision 8; and 10.24, Subdivision 5
; ' (A) & (B) to permit the construction of additions to the existing residence
; which will result in 4.9$ hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone
� where no hardcover is normal ly allowed, a 31' defined building height where
; only a 30' maximum building height is normally a1l.owed, encroachment of
' structure past the defined average lakeshore setback line where no
� encroachment is normally allowed, encroachment of deck structure to within
' 67' of the shoreline and portion of the house 74' from the shoreline where
a 75' setback for all structures is normally required, and continuation
upward of a substandard 1.8' side setback where a 10' side setback is
normally required, subject to the following conditions:
1. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone is limited to the following:
i
� New Deck & Stairway 264 s.f.
.; Portion of House 10 s.f.
t
1
.� TOTAL 2 7 4 s.f. (4.9�)
; . Applicant is advised of the 25$ and 30$ hardcover limitations in the
� 75-250' and 250-500' lakeshore setback zones respectively. No
�,� additional hardcover will be allowed in the 0-75' lakeshore setback
.:� . zone. '
� • 2. The overhang on the proposed upward additions from the existing
� house shall be no greater than 1.5' lateral ly from the house and shal 1
� not encroach into the neighboring property.
� Page 3 of 5
;
1
� • ° �
,,: d c�t� o� oR,oNo
� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
;`, Q�
- � NO. 2463
• - • •
3. Applicant is further advised that, although applicant's engineer
� has verified that the existing foundation is adequate with minor
� upgrading to support the proposed construction, if for some reason the
existing foundation is ultimately removed and must be replaced, the
applicant shall move the proposed structure so that it will meet the
10' side setback and 75' lakeshore setback requirements.
4. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property not
with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by
application for a building permit within one yea= of the date of
Council approval, or this variance wil 1 expire on that date (July 11,
1989 ) .
5. 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 shal 1 be punishable as a misdemeanor.
_ • 6. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees
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 llth day of July, 1988.
�
� AT ST: _ `
; ' �
t
� 'D rothy . Hallin, City Clerk Jam s R. Grabek, Mayor
. :�.:
� � � c�y�l,tiLi�
, �
Prope y Owner(r� �
,
;
,
:
.� .
1 •
S
Page 4 of 5
.3 • •
:;� .-_ ' . �
�;� '
� • � � �
u d c�ty o� oR,oNo
' � RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
; .:�
� NO. 2463
• � • •
• STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
�' d a o f � (,C,S � , 19 8�
On thi s a� — Y —
before me Notary Pub�ic in and f r said county, personal ly
� appeared S n �Tr– known to me to be
� the person(s) escribed in and who executed the foregoing
instrument, an acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as
his (their) free act and deed.
�G�
THEREBA L. p,,qg NOTARY PUBLIC �
���N�� , .
:� � 9-�- �a .
°� MY COMMISSION EXPIRES
. STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
'��' On thi s ���" day of �G � , 19 8$`�, bef ore me
�.f a Notary Public within and for sai County, personally appeared
;.�- –��Cl.� .fl -�N����� 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. .
,;
N TA PU
;.' ,��?i'`'�� LAURiE . SCI-�EFFLER
� ._i,��r NOTARY FUBUC—M15INNESOTA
� -w ' HENNEPIN COUNTY
��:K ;E`;`i'''�4 My commisoion enpires6•8•93
. ����
'� „ �fMY COMMISSION. EXPIRES � ,
t,y � ..,
�4� . - Pagea-5 of 5 . - .
�: ` . -
.�� � . � _- ..
�.� , . _ . ,
�'� .r-
. .
. : •
�
B�XHIBIT A
Resolution No. 2463
Legal Description:
Lot 16, Slock 6, Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County,
Minnesota; including that portion of vacated Forest
Boulevard lying between the Northwesterly extensions across
it of the Northeasterly line of said Lot 16 and the straight
portion of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 16 ; and
including the adjacent 1/2 of vacated Forest Avenue.
•
•