HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 6762Existing Certs
1327553
11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111Doc No T05449175Certified, filed and/or recorded onJun 2, 2017 4:30 PMI
Office of the Registrar of Titles
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Martin McCormick, Registrar of Titles
Mark Chapin, County Auditor and Treasurer
Deputy 9 Pkg ID 1557016M
Document Recording Fee $46.00
Document Total $46.00
This cover sheet is now a permanent part of the recorded document.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
676:2
A RESOLUTION
APPROVING VARIANCES FROM
MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1279
AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PURSUANT TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTIONS 78-966 THROUGH 78-968
FILE NO. 17-3929
WHEREAS, Antoinette Beenders (hereinafter the "Applicant') is the owner of the
property located at 1669 North Farm Road within the City of Orono and legally described as:
Lot 7, Block 1, The Farm At Long Lake, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter
the "Property");
WHEREAS, on March 22, 2017, the Applicant made application to the City of
Orono for variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 and a conditional use
permit pursuant to Sections 78-966 through 78-968 to allow site grading as well as construction
and reconstruction of decks, pool, and retaining walls located in a bluff impact zone where no
structures or grading are normally allowed and constituting an encroachment of the average
lakeshore setback where no such encroachment is normally allowed; and
WHEREAS, on April 17, 2017, after published and mailed notice in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, at which
time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to
speak thereon; and
WHEREAS, on April 17, 2017, the Planning Commission recommended approval
of the variances and conditional use permit as requested; and
WHEREAS, on May 22, 2017, the City Council reviewed the application and the
recommendations of the Planning Commission and City staff; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota
hereby approves the requested variances and conditional use permit as described above based
on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning the Property:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
Al. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #17-3929. The analysis contained within
staff memos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the
above mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these
meetings are hereby incorporated by reference.
A2. The Property is located in the LR -1A, One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 6 7 6 2
A3. The Property contains 3.1 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 205 feet at the
lakeshore and 275 feet at the 75 -foot setback line.
A4. The Property is within Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier 1 and hardcover on the
property is limited to 25%.
A5. The Applicant requests variance and CUP approval in order to replace existing decks,
retaining walls and swimming pool, all located on the lake side of the existing residence.
The project also involves regrading of the south and west yards adjacent to the pool
area and eliminating a multi -tiered retaining wall system in favor of a single tier system.
The property is a fairly steep lakeshore lot on North Farm Road, and the existing home
was constructed in 1981. While the house and pool/decks/walls are tucked into the top
of a slope that today is defined as a bluff, they were all constructed prior to City
ordinances that would have required variances for such construction.
A6. All of the proposed work is more than 100 feet from the lakeshore and appears to beat
least 75 feet from the nearest wetlands. A wetland delineation has been performed to
confirm no wetland setback issues.
A7. In addition to structure and grading within a bluff feature, the westerly half of the
proposed reconstruction is located lakeward of the average lakeshore setback line. The
westerly deck (a second story deck) will encroach slightly further lakeward than the
existing deck and patio, while in the pool area the encroachment will be approximately
the same or slightly less. The house to the east on Long Lake Boulevard will be
completely unaffected by the encroachment. The house to the west sits much further
back from the lake. The very minor additional encroachment of the expanded patio and
deck will be lower in the topography, and is not anticipated to reduce lake views enjoyed
by the neighbor.
A8. The proposed grading within the lakeshore yard is necessary in order to match the new
grades resulting from removal of the tiered retaining walls. Proposed grading plans
indicate that approximately 1'-1.5' of fill will be added in an area approximately 40'x 90',
totaling in the neighborhood of 500-600 cubic yards. Existing slope in this area is in the
30-35% range, while the proposed slope is in the 35-40% range. The proposed slope
will be more uniform, smoothing out some of the minor variations of the existing slope.
It appears there will be a few trees removed as part of this grading plan.
A9. Along the easterly yard, the tiered retaining wall system will be removed in favor of a
single wall system. In this area existing slopes range from 18% to 36%, and at the base
of the slope is a drainageway within an existing drainage easement. Proposed re-
grading after the tiered wall is removed will result in a uniform slope of about 34-36% or
between 2.5:1 and 3:1. Grading plans indicate that the drainageway will not be filled or
graded; however, a temporary culvert in the drainageway is proposed, to allow
2
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 6 7 6 Z
construction vehicle access from Long Lake Boulevard. Total fill in this area is estimated
at another 500 cubic yards, and will range up to approximately 2' deep where it replaces
the retaining walls.
A10. The proposed slopes at 2.5:1 or 3:1 are at the limit of what is maintainable as yard area.
Applicant has indicated that permanent ground cover in these sloped areas will be a low -
growth fescue which is anticipated to provide good soil stability. While grading and filling
in a bluff area is generally prohibited, the proposed replacement of the existing structures
substantially in kind with only minor revisions to allow for greater safety would appear to
be reasonable and have no additional impacts on the bluff if appropriate erosion control
and permanent vegetation measures are implemented.
A11. Construction of the proposed retaining walls in excess of 4 feet in height will require
engineering. A stairway adjacent to the easterly pool wall is propose, to replace the
existing freestanding step system located further east of the existing retaining walls and
the existing stair system extending from the westerly decks.
Al2. In considering this application for variances, the Council has considered the advice and
recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variances
upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values
of property in the surrounding area.
VARIANCE ANALYSIS:
B1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. Single
family residences are a permitted use within the LR -1A zoning district.
B2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The residential principal
structure and associated amenities are residential uses which are consistent with
the comprehensive plan guiding of this and surrounding properties for residential
use.
B3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties.
a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not
permitted by the official controls; The property owner is proposing to use the
property in a reasonable manner but the configuration and location of the
existing amenities is such that their reconstruction and replacement do not
meet the standards of the Zoning Code.
b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The
extremely lengthy lake setback of the adjacent home to the immediate west
establishes a setback line that makes the existing and proposed amenities
nonconforming; and
c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. Because the
proposed encroachments of the average setback line are essentially
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THECITY COUNCIL
NO. 6 7 "/ 2
replacing existing very similar encroachments, no impact to the character of
the neighborhood will result.
B4. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such
property or immediately adjoining property. The average setback encroachments are
a factor unique to this property because of the unusually large lake setback of the
neighboring property to the west.
B5. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which
the land is located. The standards applicable to this property apply to all other
property in the neighborhood; however, the conditions which require the variance
are unique to his property.
B6. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant. The applicant has a right to maintain the
existing amenities involved, but they have deteriorated to a point where they need
to be replaced. Proposed replacement will actually result in condensing the
footprint of the encroachments.
B7. The granting of the proposed variances will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort
or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting of
the area and width variances would not impair health, safety, comfort or morals
and would not be contrary the intent of the zoning code.
B8. The granting of such variances will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant,
but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Granting of the average setback
variance will alleviate a practical difficulty by allowing the property owner to
replace existing deteriorated amenities with new very similar amenities making
for a safer situation.
Bg. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The Applicant has
not requested consideration based on economic reasons.
B10. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight
for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth -sheltered construction as
defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter
78. This criterion is not applicable.
1311. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under
Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is
located. This criterion is not applicable.
B12. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one -family dwelling
as a two-family dwelling. This criterion is not applicable.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ANALYSIS
On the basis of the application and the evidence submitted, the City Council finds that the
proposed use at the proposed location is or will be:
4
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 676
C1. The proposed use is consistent with the Community Management Plan (CMP). The
proposed use is accessory residential in nature and such use is consistent with the
CMP guiding for this residential neighborhood.
C2. The proposed use is compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on
specific uses as required by Article V, Division 3 of the City Code. Construction of
retaining walls and site regrading to the extent proposed requires a conditional use
permit per Article V, Division 3, hence this application.
C3. Adequately served by police, fire, roads, and stormwater management. The proposed use
will be adequately served by existing services and facilities.
C4. Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system. This criteria is not
applicable to this situation.
C5. Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost. This
criterion is met
C6. Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is
planned to be used in the future. The retaining walls and grading as proposed are
expected to have no detrimental effects on adjoining or nearby properties, and are
compatible in visual and functional aspects with the surrounding properties.
C7. Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is
called for in the community management plan. The proposed walls and grading are
residential in nature and are consistent with similar features in the surrounding
/akeshore neighborhood.
C8. Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding area,
unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan. The walls
and grading are residential in nature and will be consistent with similar features in
the surrounding /akeshore neighborhood.
C9. Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area or
have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to the
impairment or impact of generally permitted uses. The proposed walls and grading are
expected to have no detrimental impacts to the neighborhood and are not expected
to affect property values.
C10. Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and activities
likely to disturb surrounding uses. The location, orientation and design of the walls and
grading plan are such that no screening or buffering will be required. The Applicant
proposes to plant additional trees lakeward of the construction which will soften the
visual impact of the improvements as viewed from the lake.
C11. Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise, glare, vibration, odors, fumes, dust,
electrical interference, general unsightliness, or other means. The walls and grading plan
are not expected to cause any of these undesirable impacts. The construction
process will be subject to City requirements for keeping roads free from dirt, mud
and debris.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. 676 2
C12. Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that cause
a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties, traffic congestion, or unsafe access.
Other than temporary construction traffic on Long Lake Boulevard, the proposed
use will not generate any of these undesirable impacts.
C13. Designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area and to
minimize environmental impact. The residential character of the walls and grading
would appear to blend well with the neighborhood, and is expected to have no
detrimental environmental impacts.
C14. All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the public
right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts. This criterion is not applicable
to this situation.
C15. Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. The walls and
grading plan are not expected to have any impact on the health, safety and welfare
of the public.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS:
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants
variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 and a conditional use permit
pursuant to Sections 78-966 through 78-968 to allow site grading as well as construction and
reconstruction of decks, pool, and retaining walls located in a bluff impact zone where no
structures or grading are normally allowed and constituting an encroachment of the average
lakeshore setback where no such encroachment is normally allowed, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Council approval is based on the survey by Mark C. Kemper of Kemper & Associates, Inc.,
dated March 22, 2017; and grading, construction and landscape plans identified as Sheets
L-1 thru L-5 by Keenan & Sveiven, Inc. dated 5/17/17, attached to this Resolution as
Exhibits A & B. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes
may require further Planning Commission and City Council review.
2. Prior to issuance of the building permit and commencement of construction, applicant and
applicant's contractor shall meet on the site with the City Engineer for a pre -construction
meeting to review the proposed construction access to Long Lake Boulevard and the
drainageway crossing. No impacts to the drainageway will be allowed. Applicant shall
adhere to the recommendations in Consulting Engineer Robert Bean's letter dated May 1,
2017.
3. Prior to issuance of the building permit, applicant shall have depicted on the survey the
wetland boundary and actual setback dimensions.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO. b762
4. Prior to issuance of the building permit, applicant shall provide detailed plans for the
proposed pool/deck drainage system outlet for City Engineer approval.
5. Applicant shall adhere to the proposed landscape/vegetation management plan attached
as Exhibit B (Sheets L-2 and L-3), including tree replacement and ground cover
establishment.
6. Applicant shall conform to all MCWD erosion control requirements.
7. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicant, but are
permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new
construction and commencing construction of said project within one year of the date of
Council approval, or the approvals will expire on that date (May 22, 2018).
8. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution may
result in the termination of any authority granted herein.
ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this 22nd day of May, 2017.
ATTEST:
Anna Carlson, City Clerk
CITY OF ORONO:
Dennis Walsh, Mayor
1 Yr ill
f9i� C,
S/
GARAGE } I••/ :�'qv •,'
M n rwsµwr
"ROAN
Dj,e6..�. LSIGN BUILD
1869 NORTH FA
v
_
b
_ T-EE PROI—IECTIp.FENC 16 61-'dLL DE RKTdLLED
LCDATION9 9NDLN ON -16 PLAN w"•
�'
\ S' i w �. �Kib•• y
q
'. TREE PROTECT P:�
ldFTE1NG W:L DE P11-1- ♦ iENCRAi ICN
ORNGE POLTp NiLENLEN --E
�(' .L'/) - - '.
� '-•:: ,y
ORYA'�E 9�LT PENCE. k�1
3 fENCPG lNdLL 6E'-LED ELT dNCwOREO BY STEEL
,� Z.D
/yW�W�y
W FSI
PENCE PGCT9 TIM MED 6 lL ClNTER -
d. TREE PROTECTIp. FENCREi t181 INBT�LED TO S `
dND MpW'-1—'NRdGUWT BUIL.— —TIM
1 -
dND NOT DE D II!'IL CO^PLEjION O: . `d
� �
i^ y. ,..» . l' ,•.
\ �
Y
. •Th +.. w..
TN T
T-L L
cON'vTRUCTIOV dNp WT'L Ld`OSGPPMS i! MlTgLLED.
- �� ""1')
w�+�+w.. �...
i
�n t
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN
L-1
NW *"VI 9NOI AVON WVVA HIMON 6991
INIM
f! P12
NOUOAUSNOO 80� iON NVId HIS ]dV3SONVIQdVNIAP]8d
945,
4 1 1 11 i 194._64
PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
�
`;
#�}
BEENDERS-MONTGOMERIE
°
r
z a n
;,;
RESIDENCE
J
If
x
2
e
1669 NORTH FARM ROAD LONG LAKE, MN
e
= s
»�
II-
���i
�
4
v�
uj
a
_'V19Nm »m_Vdmm.6991
§!
_
q)|
9
l���
•
�)
■
t �
§!
3J�3� S�
q�!!
■|
.
,
�;
■o
�
/
3�3K0g1�OK-3ON338!}!
|:!
LI -Kt
Nom nKSNo am lo:-AAGnaaa
»�
II-
���i
�
4
v�
uj
NW'3M%q DNO7 4VOHWHVAlU)lON6"1
"g¢ •�i � {F ��AI�QIS�2I E{'=��i� � � � g 'o � A
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The undersigned, being duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of
Orono, Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at the
meeting of the Orono City Council on May 22, 2017 with the original thereof on file in
my office, and the same is a correct transcription thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the
City this 22nd day of May, 2017.
Anna Carlson, City Clerk
(seal)