Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRe: variance request June 6, 2002 Mr. Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner Mr. Michael P. Gaffron, Planning Director City of Orono Dear Mr. Weinberger and Mr. Gaffron: To help with our meeting tomorrow, Jean and I have put together a summary of our variance request. Since purchasing 2800 Pheasant last fall, Jean and I have placed a lot of effort into evaluating this request from both Orono's and our perspective. Our process began with a hardcover analysis and initial meeting with Mr. Gaffron to discuss the proposal before you. We believe this property is a good candidate for a variance and that our proposal offers a"win-win" situation for Orono and the property. Jean and I look forwar to working with you and the City on this matter. Yo s ruly n and Jim E tenkamp — ; • ; � C; � -- CERTIFICATE 4F SURVEY FOR ,a RALPH BURGESS JR. � lEASANT ROAD '� s' ���;oa E"° `"`-� IN LOTS 13 AI� 14. PHEASANT LAWN , g• _— .2�•-._,. \ ' � -�-��., HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA � � � ��� �� , �.,. � � �� � � . . ', �\ �\ \ . �\ �\ �� �\\ � , : � �� , �� - �' "' � �\ � ` �. � � � � p � �\ � ; � � � -, � �� � � �� � iS ,a,; —� ��. s � � � e � �� � ...; . _ � �. z- �•. `L� -- � . '�# ----�._—�--����.�...�.�"_.�_.�-----�----.�����T-' � � , ,r„ s - �� ��\ �'•� L A G O O N � �_ ��i o -� � � ' p . � . . . � �j� ! �. : � i ' q � � �taus� � � \ � � � I --=-a� + '.°` � � _�s•sasd►�'K \ �� \ " - \ � ,.�rr�r,�.0 � � :�— \ \ ►a � ''��aa.a cartaat t� . L A K E M I N N E T O N K A ��.. ,�� 'Ut 17 ad fiM psl el lei U."PMawK Lo�.4MvLN a�la�ss�qMy d 1r - 4e�urea.y a awu cu�Mlr mn..r u u r,ar�a.�.r►..�-�a.d.wMr�.M � .. . Isy W 6.WrM tw1 M1�wn l.�b 1S OM N N IM M.tl.s�..�l's msl IFr1Mr�jr ml� ' a�da Lot�2 uria.�sMi�'a s�e�a�1Z7 p.w�s mrna.�.w Ay�t tan f�ri A�we.a a+vw a s.es�o.ee 1ae M:�M�A wiM+.M.�g vQar.M�a.�iih ir ENw�w�rM L�M 1S wd la a AMos d YOS haF,ihse¢�slay dMMcK"0��'�''�' � d S�dqM e�mi�tw te br Mt 1an bt OwwM�esr�.o data�c�N�3 N�t E�w.�at o Ay�t a�s�M�3 fwt nre a ba M IM fer�0/LaM I�Iwta'4. frs wA�l►++�br/�ar�aI sdd 1��Is M wM N Mqtw:'i eoc J�9 ro IM Ohl O 30 60 90 140 Mrnst�n 1►M d.�a.0 i�ur ertbe M 11r Mq6trs el iiuw iw w Ia W CwRI��Ms' �� e: Gw�a L�n w+Yer SCALE N FEET �'MO�ew w la�w�ia^_an a�mM Me.. 716 tvb wtws+b Na tlw Oa�Jsir d 1M Mw MVL�O P��7� � Yr Wten d w wi�Aq IisR ed M beAY�M d�ietle'1rAewr'6wM� 1 R doti nol MDa�to!w airy eMM�nM«�nw�a�wos��b. ; . ., HARDCOVER INFORMATION 2800 Pheasant Existing hardcover in the 0-75'zone = 2,785 sf Total property area in 0-75' zone = 66,046 sf Percentage of coverage = 4.22 % Proposed reduction of hardcover in 0-75' zone = 983 sf Percentage of coverage = 2.70% Existing hardcover in 75-250' zone = 7,856 sf Total property area in 75-250' zone = 22,497 sf Percentage of coverage in 75-250' zone = 34.92 % Proposed increase of hardcover in 75-250' zone = 983 sf Percentage of coverage = 39.28 % Net Change in hardcover on entire property 0 sf REQUEST To obtain a hardcover variance for the reduction of 983 square feet of non-conforming hardcover in the 0-75' zone and increase the existing hardcover in the 75-250' zone by the same square footage. The requested variance would create no change in the overall hardcover and would bring the property dwelling in compliance with set back requirements. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY 2800 Pheasant Road consists of 88,543 square feet of land of which 66,046 square feet is contained in the 0-75' zone and 22, 497 square feet is contained in the 75-250' zone. Overall hardcover on the property is 12.01% leaving 88%in a vegetated state for absorption and run-off. Currently, 983 square feet of the existing dwelling is non-conforming hardcover located in the 0-75' zone. In cooperation with governing agencies, a seawall was constructed around the peninsula in the 1970's to protect against shoreline erosion. The homeowner is responsible for maintaining the seawall on an ongoing basis. The existing dwelling, built in the 1950's, has been unoccupied and not maintained since 1998. JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REQUEST The spirit and intent of the zoning code is to ensure that the development and use of land is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive plan. The variance procedure allows the law to be modified when: 1. A unique situation exists; 2. Strict enforcement would cause undue hardship; and 3. The end result would be within the intent of the comprehensive plan Unique Situation The two-acre property is bordered by 1600 feet of shoreline and includes a peninsula. Within the property's total square footage of 88,543 feet, three quarters or 66,046 square feet are located in the 0-75' zone. This results in a property where the average lakeshore setback line is outside of the property boundaries,the actual build able acreage, within the 75-250' zone, comprises a relatively small proportion of the total lot area. In addition, the long and narrow configuration of the build able zone requires disproportionate use of hardcover for property access. Undue Hardship Section 10.08 subd. 3 of the zoning ordinance set forth examples of"undue hardships". Those specifically set forth and which apply directly to 2800 Pheasant include the following: 1. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. Three fourths of the dry acreage is in the 0-75' zone. The circumstances of a 600-foot long, 75-foot wide peninsula are wholly unique to this property. In addition,the narrow aspect of the build able zone requires a disproportionate use for the driveway access hardcover, severely minimizing hardcover for dwelling unit. 2. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance will result in 0 net hardcover change and reduce the non-conforming hardcover in the 0-75' zone. The proposed structure will establish well in the locality and preserve the character of the neighborhood. 3. Econornic consideration alone is not the reason for this request. Economic considerations really have no bearing on the request. Should a variance not be granted, the applicant would be required to rebuild on the existing foundation. The resulting hardcover in both the 0-75' and 75-250 ` zone would be unchanged from today and would result in the continued non-conformity with the zoning ordinance and the Comprehensive plan. Alternatively, if the variance is granted, it will be somewhat more expensive to set back a new home and foundation within the 75-250' zone, but the result will be a reduction in hardcover in the 0-75' zone,no net increase in hardcover, and a structure that more fully complies with the Comprehensive plan and spirit of the zoning ordinance. 4. The special conditions applying to the land are peculiar to such property and the conditibn does not generally apply to other land in the district. As stated, there is no other property in Orono that is two acres,peninsular, has one and one-half dry acres in the 0-75' zone and approximately 1,600 feet of shoreline resulting in the average lakeshore setback line outside the property boundaries. 5. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. 2800 Pheasant has been vacant for over three years. The primary reason for this inactivity is the concern that adequate housing stock could not be constructed via a variance request. In this case, a 25%hardcover limitation, combined with the difficult driveway access, would result in the inability to construct a reasonable dwelling structure. In fact the resulting available hardcover available for this two-acre site, after driveway access, would be approximately 2000sf, inclusive of overhangs sidewalks, landscaping and patio. Such a limitation effectively deprives the applicant of it's properiy right to construct a reasonable dwelling unit on their land. 6. The granting of the variance will not be contrary to the intent of the zoning code. In fact, the granting will bring the property more within the spirit of the zoning ordinance by decreasing hardcover in the 0-75' zone and significantly increasing the grassed surface for run off in the 0-75' zone when the dwelling structure is moved back into the 75-250' zone. 7. The granting of such variance is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship. Granting the variance will allow the homeowner to move back the structure and shorten the excessively long driveway access. The proposed structure would include a circular drive, which would reduce the need for off street pazking by the residence. In addition to improving access to the property, we feel this is an important safety consideration. The neighborhood is currently served by the fire hydrant located at the entrance to 2800 Pheasant. The cul-de-sac also serves as parking for approximately twelve summer docks. Additional off street parking by the residence could result in difficult access to the hydrant by the fire department. In addition, the instructions to the variance application require a hardship to be: a. Uncommon; b. Run with the land; And further the instructions provide examples of such hardships including: a. Lakes; b. Existing structure locations; and c. Unusually shaped property without adjacent vacant land. The above instructions are directly on point with 2800 Pheasant. Comprehensive Plan Our request for variance also is consistent with the goals and spirit of the Comprehensive plan: . , 1. Impervious surface within the 0-75' zone is being reduced with no net increase of overall hardcover. 2. Grassed surface is being increased in the 0-75' zone,providing for additional area for rainfall run-off not only from 2800 Pheasant, but also the adjacent property which lies on higher ground and drains to the 0-75' zone of 2800 Pheasant. 3. The proposed structure is not nearer the shoreline than the neighboring residence (in fact it will be set back some twenty feet further than currently exists) and is in keeping with the Character of the locality. 4. No Lakeview enjoyed by neighboring property will be affected, other than positively. In fact, view encroachments to our westerly neighbor will be decreased. 5. Granting the variance will not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air and will not pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property. SUMMARY In summary, while the request requests a variance from the 25% hardcover ordinance, it also address' the significant hardships associated with the applicant's property while more fully complying with the intent and spirit of the zoning ordinance than the exiting structure. The improved structure removes a blighted property and provides badly needed improved housing stock on the existing site, while conforming to and improving the conditions of the neighborhood. The applicant's request addresses the exact circumstances that Section 10.08 subd. 3 of the zoning ordinance contemplate.