HomeMy WebLinkAbout#3614-variance-1995 e743.1/1 )
K CITY of ORONO
il# RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
4kESHOg' NO. 8 6 14
A RESOLUTION GRANTING
A VARIANCE TO
MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVLSION 5 (B)
FILE #2067
WHEREAS, Bruce and Terri Clark (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of
the property located at 625 Old Long Lake Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City")
and legally described as follows:
That part of the west half of the southwest quarter of Section 36, Township 118 North,
Range 23 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian described as follows:
Beginning at the point of intersection of the east line of said west half of the southwest
quarter and the northerly line of the Minnesota Western Railway; thence north along the
east line of said west half 211.46 feet to the center line of County Road No. 27; thence
deflect to the left 93 degrees 21 minutes along the center line of the road 239.15 feet;
thence southerly to a point in the northerly line of said Railway right-of-way, which point
is 238.69 feet westerly, measured along said Railway right-of-way, from the point of
beginning; thence easterly along said Railway right-of-way to the point of beginning,
Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and
WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal
Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of an attached garage
addition located 23.4' from the west side lot line where a 30' side yard setback is normally
required.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono,
Minnesota:
FINDINGS
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2067.
2. The property is located in the RR-1B, 2 acre Single Family Rural Residential
Zoning District.
Page 1 of 4
1,, 0
O -i, O
-1 o_ CITY of ORONO
IA. �;Wi KGs RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
910ESIIOg' NO. 3 6 1 4
3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 18,
1995, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the
following findings:
A. The existing garage is 23.7' from the west side lot line. The proposal to
reconstruct the existing garage and construct an additional 10' to the rear
will result in a final side yard setback of 23.4'.
B. The neighboring residence is approximately 30' from the lot line and the
separation between the two houses is approximately 50-60', adequate to
result in no significant impact on the neighboring property.
C. The existing garage is in need of major repair, and the location of the
existing house constitutes a hardship for reconstruction of the attached
garage. The additional 10' to the rear will have no additional impact on
the neighbor.
4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and
recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments
by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
5. The City Council fords 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 applicants, 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 fmdings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance
to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of an
attached garage located 23.4' from the west side lot line where a 30' side yard setback is
normally required, subject to the following conditions:
Page 2 of 4
O ' Y
O
CITY of ORONO
4?4,9 �; I��. seti RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
kH
ES0g' 8
NO. 6 ,
1. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants,
but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building
permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will
expire on that date (October 9, 1996).
2. 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 shall be punishable as a misdemeanor.
3. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms
of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns,
hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the
property.
Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of October, 1995.
A T:
/V orothy M.ji in, City Clerk ward J. 914r/., May
/,
Property Owner(s)
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) /
ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of
October, 1995, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & 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.
0AltaiX
JAMIE L.BOSMA
1• NOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA NO b11C
HENNEPIN COUNTY
,••o My Commission Expire Jan.31,2000
Page 3 of 4
O _�� O
-�3 ,t 0 CITY of ORONO
0,1- A
. ,,;1., ,,
:'s, , I,iM� �Gti RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
kESII�g' NO. 3 6 1
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) —
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this i 24-I:` day of , 199 before me a Notary
Public within and for said county,personally appeared ,e,z_ 1) .4_,..„ ),),.4_,„ ( - .KK
. )-}: > -S known to me to be the person(s) described riin and who executed
the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free
act and deed.
Yl/%Y///////// /%//��
ti JAMIE L.BOSMA
: NOTARYPUBLIC-MINNESOTA
%wlHENNEPIN COUNTY L..-,-%—). L .�
.••' My Commission Expires Jan.31,2000
. . -..•,. . .rf.,r �-1�.�ff� ..o NOTARY LIC
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this day of , 199_ before me a Notary
Public within and for said county,personally appeared
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.
NOTARY PUBLIC
Page 4 of 4