My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-24-1997 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1997
>
03-24-1997 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/31/2023 3:16:37 PM
Creation date
7/31/2023 3:10:08 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.
/
370
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
WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal <br />Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) to permit the construction of a deck to the <br />lakeside of a proposed residence to be located 103' from the shoreline and 8' forward of the <br />average lakeshore setback where no such encroachment is allowed. Per Section 10.25, <br />Subdivision 6, the height of the structure is proposed at 31' 4" where IVi stories at 30' is <br />allowed. <br />Minnesota: <br />1. <br />2. <br />3. <br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, <br />FINDINGS <br />This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2220. <br />The property is located in the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential <br />Zoning District requiring one-half acre in area. The property consists of 25,345 <br />s.f. or .58 acres. <br />The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on March 17, 1997 <br />and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following <br />findings: <br />A. The subject property is a comer lot with two side yards and a front yard. <br />B. The lot confomts to the LR-IC requirements for lot area and yard <br />requirements. <br />C. The lot has been combined into one tax parcel. <br />D. The proposed design conforms to structural coverage and lot area <br />requirements. <br />E. The City has received no negative comments from adjacent property <br />owners. <br />F. The applicants are trying to preserve mature trees on the subject property. <br />Page 2 of 5 <br />■ -----------------------------------------------------------
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.