My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-22-2002 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2002
>
07-22-2002 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2023 10:16:23 AM
Creation date
2/9/2023 9:37:55 AM
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.
/
555
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
2. The property is located in the LR-1B, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning <br />District where I acre is the minimiun lot size and 140 feet is the minimum lot width. <br />- 3. The Planning Commission reviewed the application for variances and recommended <br />approval by a vote of 7 to 0 based on the following findings and hardships: <br />A. I'he lot was platted prior to current zoning standards. <br />B. This property does have a number of factors to consider that make <br />construction of a new garage that conforms in location dittlcult. The <br />topography of the lot does not make placing a new garage on the property that <br />has an adequate turning radius and provides proper drainage. A side loading <br />garage will leave a relatively flat area to maneuver vehicles and allow <br />drainage from the street to bypass the buildings and house. <br />C. The total distance beUveen the new garage and the existing retaining wall will <br />be 22 ’. A garage meeting the required setback would only leave 1T which is <br />not adequate for safe backing of vehicles. <br />D. A garage with direct access to the street would require fill to be brought in to <br />raise the ground elevation and create a flat approach in front of the garage. It <br />would not be feasible to have the driveway continue to slope down to the <br />garage as winter conditions may cause a vehicle to slide into the building. <br />Additionally, the driveway design needs to be done to ensure that any water <br />would be diverted away from the building. <br />E. According to I lennepin County plat maps and the sur\ ey submitted w ith the <br />application, there is a portion of Forest Lane (undeveloped) located between <br />this property and the lakeshore. It is assumed that this portion of the Forest <br />Lane will be combined with the applicant’s property at some time in the <br />future. It has ser\’cd as the lakeshore access for this lot. Other lots in the <br />neighborhood have had Forest Lane vacated and a few lots have combined <br />that portion of property with the residential site. For current zoning purposes <br />this lot is being considered a lakeshore lot for setback purposes even though <br />the legal desrription and property records do not include the vacated portion <br />of the road. This is an important distinction for this property because a non- <br />lakeshore lot would not permit an accessory building to be located closer to <br />the street than the house. <br />Page 2 of6
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.