HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 2537City of OR ONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 2537
A RESOLUTION DENYING
VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 & 2
FILE NO. 1323
WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized
and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to State Statutes 412 et. seq. and 462 et. seq.
the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted Zoning Regulations for
the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; and
WHEREAS, Jon W. Papas (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner
of the property located at 3369 Crystal Bay Road within the City of Orono
(hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows:
Lot 14, Wallaces Addition to the Village of Minnetonka Beach, Hennepin
County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for after -the -fact
variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and 2 to
grant after -the -fact approval for construction of a deck which constitutes
0_iardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone in excess of the 25%
hardcover normally allowed, and which constitutes structure within the 75'
lakeshore setback where no structure is normally allowed, and which
encroaches nearer the lake than the defined average lakeshore setback line
where no encroachment is normally allowed; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the application; the
recommendations of the staff and'Planning Commission; the comments and
written statements submitted by the neighboring property owners; and the
comments and written statements of the applicant.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City
of Orono hereby denies the requested hardcover, setback and average setback
variances for the property described above based upon one or more of the
following findings of fact concerning this, property:
1. The property is located in the LR -1C, Single Family Lakeshore
Residential Zoning District.
2. The existing residence structure is located 65' from the shoreline
of Lake Minnetonka.
Page 1 of 3
C7
W__-;_
W_
City of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
m
2537
3. The applicant constructed the existing deck in the spring and
summer of 1988 without the required building permit, in violation of
the City's hardcover, lakeshore setback and average lakeshore setback
ordinances. The deck that was constructed is only 55' from the shore-
line of Lake Minnetonka, where a 75' setback is normally required.
The deck encroaches 11' past the average lakeshore setback line where
no encroachment is normally allowed. The deck increases the hardcover
in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone to 26.3% where no hardcover is
normally allowed.
4. The applicant has demonstrated no adequate hardships to justify
granting of after -the -fact variances to allow the structure to remain.
5. Granting of the after -the -fact variances would not enhance Orono's
goal of maintaining the quality of water entering Lake Minnetonka.
6. Approval of after -the -fact variances for the deck would be
inconsistent with contemporary variance approvals granted by the City.
.7. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their regular
meeting of October -17, 1988 and voted 5 in favor, 2 against, to
recommend denial of the after -the -fact variances, finding that:
A. No hardship was .presented that adequately justifies the
after -the -fact variances.
B. Approval of the structure will not enhance the quality of
water entering Lake Minnetonka.
C. This application, if it had been before -the -fact, would
likely have not been approved since approval would be
inconsistent with past City practice in similar situations.
8. The City Council finds that because the residence has a front door
which previously had a front step for access, which was removed to
accommodate the deck, it is appropriate for the applicant to replace
the front step as necessary to provide safe access to the house. Such
front step structure and its associated hardcover shall not exceed 30
s.f.
9. After -the -fact approval cannot be granted because such approval
would not meet the special conditions of Municipal Code Section 10.08,
Subdivision 3 regarding demonstration of a hardship, as follows:
A. The. property in question can be put to a reasonable use if
used under conditions allowed by the official controls.
Page 2 of 3
W' -1 -
City of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 2537
B. The plight of landowner is due to circumstances created by
the landowner.
Page 3 of 3
C. The variances if granted will alter the essential character
of the locality, by extending structures closer to the lake than
the neighboring properties.
D. Economic consideration, including the fact that the structure
has already been built, is not an undue hardship because a
reasonable use for the property exists under the conditions
allowed by the Zoning Chapter.
E. The same conditions applying to the structure in question
apply generally to other land and structures in the district and
are not peculiar to this property.
F.' The granting of the variances is not necessary for
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the
applicant.
G. The granting of the variances would be contrary to the intent
of the Zoning Code.
H. The granting of - the variances would serve merely as a
convenience to the applicant but is not necessary to alleviate
demonstrable hardship or difficulty.
10.
The property owner shall remove the 101x20' deck structure by
December 15, 1988.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono this 14th day of
November,
1988.
ATT T:
4JamR:..�G-rabek,
Do othy Mallin,
City Clerk Mayor
Barbara A. Peterson, Acting Mayor
Page 3 of 3