My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4300 Watertown - Condemnation Hearing Info
Orono
>
Property Files
>
Street Address
>
W
>
Watertown Road
>
4300 Watertown Road - 31-118-23-13-0013
>
Correspondence
>
Co Rd 6 Upgrade-Condemnations (1. Hanning 2. Johnson)
>
4300 Watertown - Condemnation Hearing Info
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/22/2023 4:29:18 PM
Creation date
1/21/2022 3:06:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
x Address Old
House Number
4300
Street Name
Watertown
Street Type
Road
Address
4300 Watertown Road
Document Type
Correspondence
PIN
3111823130013
Supplemental fields
ProcessedPID
Updated
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
310
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• <br /> Significantly, the Orono City Code also addresses at least one zoning <br /> • ramification of the combination of lots for tax purposes. Section 11.03.66.a.2 which <br /> discusses Class I subdivisions, permits the formation of Class I subdivisions without <br /> formal platting if the property was previously combined for tax purposes. Exhibit 11. <br /> • <br /> The clear implication of that section is that the combination of lots for tax purposes <br /> has the additional effect of combining lots for zoning and other land use purposes. <br /> • D. " Vested" Rights <br /> Respondent claims that he has a "vested" right to develop Parcel 29 as six <br /> platted lots. This theory ignores the fact that he bought the parcel after the <br /> • <br /> minimum lot size increased from one to five acres. He knew that he purchased six <br /> platted lots that had become non-conforming by the zoning change. Further, Orono <br /> • issued him a building permit to build his residence based on "all combined lots" in <br /> the Mark One plat. Exhibit 3. The city reviewed his plans regarding building <br /> requirements in the RR-1A zoning district by considering the entire parcel as one lot. <br /> • <br /> The city would not have issued him a building permit without a variance if he had <br /> applied for it using only Block 2, Lot 2 as the proposed lot for his home. See Exhibit <br /> • 12. <br /> The facts of this case resemble those considered by the Eighth Circuit Court <br /> of Appeals in Wermager v. Cormorant Township Board, 716 F.2d 1211 (8' Cir. <br /> • <br /> 1983). In Wermager, the plaintiffs intended to develop their land as a resort area. <br /> They platted a portion of the land and began development on it. In cooperation with <br /> • the Township, they agreed to construct a sewage disposal facility for which they <br /> donated three acres of land and spent $11,561. Several years later, the Township <br /> • 7 <br /> Ann Pace i.0 of JJ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.