My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-26-2004 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2004
>
04-26-2004 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2023 8:55:25 AM
Creation date
1/19/2023 4:08:06 PM
Metadata
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.
/
447
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
r <br />75’-250 ’ zone, 30% in the 250 ’-500 ’ zone and 35% in the 500 ’-l000 ’ <br />zone. <br />4. Section 78-1403; Variance to pennit 16% Lot Coverage by Structures <br />when 15% is normally permitted. <br />5. Section 78-1467 (3): Variance to permit an existing sign to be located 2 ’ <br />outside the properly boundary. <br />6. Section 78-1516: Variance to parking stall requirement where City <br />Ordinance would teclinically require 147 stalls and only 104 stalls are <br />proposed. <br />WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the application; the recommendation <br />of the City staff and Planning Commission; and the comments and written statements <br />submitted by the applicant. <br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, <br />Miimesota hereby denies the requested conditional use permit, commercial site plan <br />review and associated variances as described above based on one or more of the <br />following findings of fact concerning this property: <br />1. The property is in close proximity to the residential neighborhood to the <br />south. The entrance and parking area for the proposed use directly abuts <br />the adjacent residential neighborhood. <br />2. The potential for increased levels of noise, traffic, activity, public <br />disturbances, litter, damage to property, and calls to police that can <br />accompany a site which serves liquor, have a high potential to be <br />disruptive to the immediately adjacent residential neighborhood. <br />3. The City Council on March 22, 2004 denied a liquor license for the <br />proposed Class II restaurant. <br />4. The granting of the requested variances would be contrary to the <br />provisions of Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-123 with which the <br />^plicant must first comply in order that variances be granted. The <br />Council finds that: <br />Page 2 of 4
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.