Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Thursday, August 24, 2020 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 6 of 8 <br /> <br />Mr. Gamble said that is part of the question he had in March, where do they go from here and that is why <br />they got the legal advice and found they could use land North of the lagoon to qualify to get the lot to <br />one-acre, which is unique, noting that the majority on Lake Minnetonka are not an acre. He said they did <br />meet that and the second lot meets the 140-foot width on the front and he believes the zoning on the back <br />only has to be a 100-foot width. <br /> <br />Walsh stated he doesn’t mind having any hoops an Applicant has to jump through to get it to conformity, <br />but it’s still not conforming. <br /> <br />Barnhart said it would be the width on existing Tract B and potentially the width on the new Lot 1 on the <br />other side. He noted there is a boundary between LR1C1 and the other zone. <br /> <br />Crosby asked if the Northern lot has buildable size. <br /> <br />Seals asked if you combined those two as one does it make it conforming. <br /> <br />Barnhart stated the two Northern lots are both conforming now, he noted where they’re rubbing up <br />against an immovable object is the two lots to the South of the lagoon and trying to make them <br />conforming. Short of acquiring land property from the West, which is not under the control of the <br />Applicant, they cannot make those conforming. However, it’s not uncommon where a property owner <br />doesn’t have quite enough and may need to negotiate with a neighboring property to acquire additional <br />land. <br /> <br />Crosby asked if the same owner owns the lot to the North. <br /> <br />Barnhart answered no. <br /> <br />Printup clarified there are two different people altogether and the only one the Council is looking at is on <br />the right of the map on screen and above it. <br /> <br />Barnhart stated the problem is the lower lots. <br /> <br />Crosby said they need those portions to be somewhat conforming even though they’re non-conforming, <br />and asked if that is correct. <br /> <br />Walsh noted they are currently conforming, but they want to subdivide. <br /> <br />Barnhart clarified that one is non-conforming right now, noting the one on the left of the map on screen is <br />non-conforming because of width. <br /> <br />Walsh said once they start subdividing, they are at 50% of the four lots being non-conforming. <br /> <br />Mr. Gamble noted the one on the right onscreen has the acreage requirement and the new lot is 100 feet <br />wide and meets the zoning requirement. <br /> <br />Barnhart said he thinks what Walsh is referring to is the “finger” that goes North of the lagoon as it is 25 <br />feet wide and the requirement, even if it’s a favorable zoning location, would be 100 feet. <br />