HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 3064CITYof ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 3064
A RESOLUTION GRANTING
VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTIONS 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C),
AND 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2;
AND DENYING A VARIANCE TO SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 15 (F)
FILE #1682
WHEREAS, Christine Brickley (hereinafter "the
applicant") is owner of the property located at 3262 North Shore
Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally
described as follows:
Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property"); and
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for an
after -the -fact variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03,
• Subdivision 15 (F) to allow a proposed detached garage of 672
s.f. to be constructed 3.3' from the west side lot line where a
setback of 10' is normally required from a side lot line; and a
variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to allow lot
coverage in excess of the 15% lot coverage normally allowed; and
a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow hardcover in
the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone in excess of the 25% hardcover
normally allowed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
Orono, Minnesota:
FINDINGS
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1682.
2. The property is located in the LR -1C-1, Single Family
Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, requiring a
minimum lot size of one-half acre.
3. The Orono Planning Commission originally reviewed this
application on September 16, 1991, at which time a
1,056 s. f. garage was proposed to be located 3.3' from
the west lot line and 2.5' from the south lot line,
such proposal requiring variances to hardcover, lot
coverage, and side and rear setbacks. The Planning
• Commission indicated to applicant the likelihood of a
recommendation for denial, and tabled the request to
allow the applicant to submit a revised plan.
Page 1 of 9
O � O
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
SSOg NO. 3064
4. On October 21, 1991 the Planning Commission reviewed a
revised proposal for construction of a 24' x 32' (768
s.f.) garage located 3.3' from the west lot line and
10.5' from the south lot line, requiring side and rear
setback variances, a lot coverage variance, and a
hardcover variance. The Planning Commission voted 6 to
0 to recommend approval, based on the following
findings:
A. The proposed 768 s.f. detached garage replaces
a pre-existing 480 s.f. garage, 200 s.f. barn, and
80 s.f. storage shed with a single structure of
approximately the same square footage as the 3
pre-existing buildings.
B. The pre-existing 75-250' hardcover was 50.6%. If
• an 8' x 32' portion of the concrete garage slab
which was poured without prior approvals is
removed, hardcover on the property would be
reduced to 46.9% in the 75-250' zone.
C. Lot coverage by structures would remain at the
pre-existing level of 17.5%. The small lot size
of 0.28 -acre constitutes a. hardship to the
property. Consolidation of 3, storage buildings on
the property into a single building will reduce
the visual density and clutter in the
neighborhood.
D. Locating the garage 10.5' f rom the south 1 of 1 ine
is justified from the standpoint that if the
garage was 18 s.f. smaller, only a 10' setback
would be required rather than 151* for any
accessory building of area 750-1000 s.f. The 3.3'
setback from the west lot line is justified by the
need to maintain the full 32' depth of the garage
without encroaching on the loop driveway which
serves the immediate neighborhood.
5. The revised garage proposal showed a roof peak running
east/west, which would discharge stormwater run-off to
• applicant's yard rather than the neighboring property.
Page 2 of 9
i
O
O , O
CITY of ORONO
GA%V RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
��kESH�g� NO. 3064
6. After the Planning Commission meeting, applicant
proceeded to construct a garage without final Council
approval or the necessary building permit. During that
construction, the roof line was reversed so that run-
off will be directed towards the westerly neighboring
property which is only 3' from the garage wall and less
than 2' from the roof overhang.
7. The garage as constructed is 21' x 321, or 672 s.f. in
footprint area, requiring 10' setbacks from both the
south and west lot lines. The garage was constructed
14' from the south lot line and 3.3' from the west lot
line. The site plan with the garage as constructed
yields 75-250' hardcover of 50.6%, with lot coverage by
structures of 16.7%.
• 8. The City Council reviewed the "as -built" site plan at
the November 12, 1991 Council meeting, and voted 5 to 0
to table the request, directing applicant to meet with
staff to consider other options.
9. At the January 13, 1992 Council meeting, Council
reviewed a number of alternative proposals resulting in
various degrees of variance to the performance
standards of hardcover, lot coverage, and setback. On
a vote of 4 to 0, Council conceptually granted a
hardcover variance to allow 50.6% hardcover in the 75-
2504 zone, 16.3% lot coverage by structures, and
denying the requested west side setback variance, based
on the following findings:
A. No suitable hardship is demonstrated for allowing
the substandard side setback for this illegally
constructed garage.
B. If the west end of the garage is removed to the
10' setback line, the remaining 21' x 25' garage
results in a final lot coverage of 16.3%, a
decrease of 1.2% from the pre-existing 17.5% lot
coverage by structures.
0
Page 3 of 9
.-..�._..�..........»..a��...�.._.....-_�......—..._. _..c..,_-.ay..-..-.....�..._.-. ��..1c ....w._.'...'-i'i �..... __.._.2. ... _.. i ._ .. �.: z.Y,:._ ___..: iw:-.tV :.. ..:way. a...._.v�
O
O O
S 0
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 3064
C. Even if the portions of slab outside the footprint
of the garage are allowed to remain, hardcover
will still be at 50.6% in the 75-250' zone, no
change from the pre-existing hardcover conditions
on the property.
D. Allowing the illegally constructed garage to
remain at a location less than 10' from the west
side lot line creates an unwarranted encroachment
of open space enjoyed by the neighboring adjacent
property, such open space being critical to
maintain in this neighborhood of generally
substandard sized lots.
10. 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 variances on the
health, safety and welfare of the community.
11. 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 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.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS
Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council
hereby grants an after -the -fact variance to Municipal Zoning
Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow hardcover in the 75-
250' lakeshore setback -zone to remain at 50.6% where only 25%
hardcover is normally allowed; and grants an after -the -fact
variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to allow lot
coverage of 16.3% where only 15% lot coverage is normally
• required; and denies an after -the -fact variance to Section 10.03,
Subdivision 15 (F), hereby disallowing construction of the garage
at a location closer than the required 10' setback from the west
side lot line, subject to the following conditions:
Page 4 of 9
O
,� ...
ti
CITY of ORONO
Pbq
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
�kESH0 NO, 3064
1. Hardcover in'the 75-250' zone is approved at a level of
50.6%. All existing and proposed hardcover approved
with this variance approval is recorded in the
calculation worksheet and diagram enclosed with the
resolution as Page 6. The current property owner and
all future owners of the property are placed on notice
that hardcover shall not be increased above the
currently approved level, and any proposed improvements
over the property that would result in additional
hardcover in either the 0-75' or 75-250' zone must be
approved by the City. Such approval may result in
requirement for concurrent equivalent or greater
removals of existing hardcover. Any existing hardcover
l not shown on the approved hardcover diagram and
calculation worksheet shall be removed no later than
June 1, 1992.
• 2. The garage shall be reconstructed to meet the required
10' west side setback. The west and south walls of
said garage shall then be retrofitted with proper slab
reinforcements subject to review and approval by the
Building Inspector. Further, if the garage is
reconstructed such that the roof line continues to
discharge in a westerly direction, applicant shall
provide a roof gutter system to direct such drainage to
the north of the garage, away from the remaining
portions of slab adjacent to the west and south lot
lines.
3. Prior to commencement of reconstruction or completion
of the garage, applicant shall provide the building
inspector with suitable construction plans conforming
to the conditions of this resolution, and shall obtain.
the appropriate permit for such construction. In
addition to the normal building permit fee, applicant
shall pay the after -the -fact investigation fee for the
building permit because construction was commenced
prior to issuance of the building permit.
4. Applicant shall pay the after -the -fact investigation
fee for the zoning application because construction was
• commenced without the proper variance approvals being
obtained.
Page 5 of 9
r- I
L
4-5-5.3
It
i
s N� _
A PP,e;�v
S TV0
To
*x 2-0_'B
0—
jeoru,ovm
6 -__STS ------
)c I
—n
jy
TD
14AeDcOtte'R- Or
Page6 of 9
0
L_i
A4
ti
J�
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 3064
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono,
Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 27th day of January,
1992.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
0- /
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on
this 27th day of January 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy
M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota
municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf
of the City.
v�
Nota y Public
Page 8 of 9
LINDA S. VEE
NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA
HENNEPIN COUNTY
My commission expires 8-12-98
pop
•
is
kESH0
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
ss.
On thi s r"f
before me a N tart' Publ
appeared
known to me to be the p
foregoing instrument,
the same as his (their)
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 3064
day of ' 19 9=
within and r said county, personally
1)
erson(s)It escrib 91-1A and who executea ui=
and acknowledged that he (they) executed
free act and deed.
Not r Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA.) T" JAMIE L. BOSMA
�� NOTARY PUBLIC -MINNESOTA
) ss . HENNEPIN COUNTY
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) •.".• My Comm. Expires 12-19-97
day of 199
On this personally
before me a Notary Public within and for said county , p
appeared
cribed in and who
known to me to be the person(s) desexecuted the
foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed
the same as his (their) free act and deed.
Notary Public
Page 9 of 9
•
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO.3064
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
That part o£ Government Lot. 1�,1. Section 8 ' '
a , , Township 117North, Range 23, West
of the 5th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described us
follows: Beginning at meander corner No. 57 on the South side of Maxt:ell Bay
in the East line of said Section 8; thence South on the East line of said
Section 8, 376.35 feet; thence due West at right angles 455.3 feet to the
actual point of beginning of the tract to be described; thence continuing due
West 68 feet; thence due North.140.7 feet more or less to the Southerly shore
1 of Maxwell Bay; thence Northeasterly along the Southerly shore of Maxwell Bay
to a point in a line drawn due North from the actual point of beginning; thence
due South 183.7 feet more or less to the actualpoint of beginning. For the
purpose of this description the East line of said Section 8 is considered to be
a due North and South line. Together with an easement for driveway purposes
1 over that part of Government Lot 1, Section 8, Township 117, Range 23, Hei-inepin
- County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at meander corner No. 57 on
the South side of Maxwell Bay in the East line of said Section. 8; therice South
along the East line of said Section 8, 376.35 feet; thence due West at right
angles 447.8 feet to the actual point of beginning of the tract to be
described; thence due South 82.05 feet; thence South 11 degrees, 47 minutes
West 218.55 feet; thence South 12 degrees, 37 minutes East 71 feet more or less
to a point in the Northerly right of way line of County Road No. 51; thence
Southwesterly along said Northerly right of way line 15.1 feet; thence North 12
degrees, 37 minutes West 73.85 feet; thence North 11 degrees, 47 minutes East
218.85 feet; thence due North 82.05 feet more or less to a point in a line
drawn due West frau the actual point of beginning; thence due East 15 feet to
the actual point of beginning. For the purpose of this description the East
line of said Section 8 is considered to be a due North and South line.
r