The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About#4670-denying variance-2001 • � /�'� / /� O� O O ��, CITY of URONO � � �� G'� " RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL `�kEsK� No. 4 6 �' � � A RESOLUTION DENYING VARIANCES PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 15 FILE #2670 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, C ryl Kramer and Peter Kramer (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located t 2140 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono(hereinafter"the City") and legally described as llows: Lots 5 and 6, Block 2, Markville, Hennepin County, Minnesota(hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City of Orono for a variance to Municipal Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 to permit a 6' fence along the south property line where a fence with a maximum height of 3 '/2' is permitted within the standard setback to the North Shore Drive right-of-way. WHEREAS,the City Council has reviewed the application; the recommendations of the City staff and the Planning Commission;and the comments and written statements submitted by the applicant. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby denies the requested after-the-fact variances as described above based on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning this property: 1. The applicants have requested a variance to permit a 6'fence along the south property line(North Shore Drive/County Road 51)where fences are only permitted to be 3 '/z' in height within a required street yard setback. The Orono zoning ordinance does not Page 1 of 4 � �� 0 0 �� CITY of ORONO a � � �� '� ' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL �kEsxo�`'� rvo. 4 6 7 � � allow a fence greater than 3 '/z' in height within a required setback to a property line adj acent to a street. The RR-1 B zoning district has a required 50'setback to the south property line. 2. The zoning ordinance does permit fences 6'in height along the street lot line of lake frontage lots which front on a major thoroughfare, as North Shore Drive is designated. The reason the higher fence is permitted along the street on lake frontage lots is the rear of the house is usually where outside storage is located and that portion of the property generally functions as a rear yard. Applicant's lot is not a lake frontage lot. 3. Fences are permitted 3 `/z' in height along all property lines, except a 6' fence is allowed along the north property line outside of the 50' setback from both streets. The property owner has stated the reasons for the fence are the lot's proximity to the road, the direction the house faces, and the hazards of the road as they relate to traffic, noise, and safety. 4. A row of shrubs between 4-6' in height is located on the property. The fence would be located between the shrubs and the house to minimize the visual impact of the fence from the road. Fences along the road can create a"tunnel"appearance if many properties were to construct fences higher than those permitted by the zoning ordinance. Many of the existing shrubs are within the County Road right-of-way. The City of Orono has no assurance the vegetation will not be removed without input from the property owner or the City. 5. The Planning Commission held a public hearing and reviewed the application on April 16, 2001 and had a split vote of 2 ayes to 3 nays on a motion to recommend approval of the application. The Planning Commission did not have a consensus on making a finding of hardship and had concerns about setting a precedent to allow fences to exceed the Code requirements. 6. The Planning Commission requested the applicants complete a certificate of survey prior to the item being heard by the City Council. No survey has been completed. 7. The applicant made a verbal statement to Staff it was his intension to no longer pursue the variance application on July 5, 2001. Page 2 of 4 • - - , :� °�\ �o o��, D � �� CITY of ORONO I �� G� / /� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ��`9kESHp4%// NO. � � `� � ��__=' Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on this 9th day of Jul}�. �001. ATTEST: .�. � ,;�.�' .C�X�4,�C� �7`' ''�u � � i �' �J��tt..El � . Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of Februar�-. 1999, by Barbara A. Peterson & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the Cit�. ��/�� '��--.'�� ,, ti / Notary P lic _e` fM1�=� ,r+ _� �P1'A�JfJ JOHNSON ;.,.;.. �r�y P�B��•MlNNES07q ��P�res Jan.31,yp05 Page 4 of 4