Laserfiche WebLink
0 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 15,1997 <br />( #4 - #2298 Conley Brooks, Jr., and John Brooks - Continued) <br />Floyd asked what other properties could do the same as indicated by this proposal. Gaffron said <br />contiguity must be shown in order to preserve the code. The properties must abut or be adjacent to <br />be combined and must include a principal structure. He noted there are many cases where docks are <br />located across the road from the principal structure. <br />Gaffron explained the approval for the lot combination of 980 West Ferndale that was conceptually <br />approved by Council. Floyd noted the hearings in process regarding that approval. The ability to <br />gain access to the lake through dredging was noted to have received a permit from the DNR. <br />Floyd's Attorney, Kevin DeVore, asked about the use of the land by Brooks and the taxation of Lot <br />13 if it is not combined with another tax parcel. Schroeder reported that the land is taxed but not <br />legally combined. Gaffron reported that the legal combination includes issuance of a new tax <br />number. He noted Lot 13 was contiguous and part of the 905 West Ferndale parcel but came out of <br />a separate subdivision. Smith noted the issue is not one of continuity but of relative space. Gaffron <br />agreed. <br />• Brooks informed the Commission that he would be uncomfortable with maintaining and using <br />property that he did not own. He felt the two properties are consistent in view of drawing a logical <br />line for ownership. <br />• <br />Schroeder asked if the dispute regarding the 20' land strip had any bearing on this application. <br />Gaffron said it is his understanding that it does not. The 20' strip is apparently a separate piece of <br />land jointly owned by Floyd and Brooks. He indicated Brooks is attempting to acquire property <br />further east on the south side of the road center line exclusive of the City road. <br />Hawn moved, Schroeder seconded, to grant the request as submitted with a legal combination of Lot <br />13 or special lot combination if Hennepin County will not legally combine. <br />McMillan asked that the motion include the clarification that the peninsula piece of land is <br />unbuildable. It was noted the parcel is in the 0 -75' setback. A rational continuity is to be shown for <br />the combination to occur. It was noted that the special lot combination resolution allows for <br />approving a subdivision with special restrictions by covenants. <br />Berg questioned whether the additional land would be used in determining the amount of hardcover <br />available. Gaffron indicated the 0 -75' and 75 -250' setback areas are considered separately. <br />Schroeder said the lot size is what will increase. <br />21 <br />