My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-14-1993 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1993
>
06-14-1993 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/29/2023 2:36:46 PM
Creation date
12/29/2023 2:31:47 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.
/
445
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
1-. <br />April 13. 1993 Uu <br />> 1 <br />Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator <br />Orono City Hall <br />2780 Kelley Parkway <br />Orono, Minnesota <br />« ^ ^ • <br />APR 1' •■'I 1995 <br />Dear Ms. Mabusth; <br />This letter is in response to the Land Use Application #1811 for the property at 3237 Casco <br />Circle. The property owner, Mr. Jack Remien, has requested lot area/lot width variances on <br />this substandard sized property (lot 18) to accommodate the sale of this property. (It should <br />be noted that the adjoining property, lot 19, owned by Mr. Remien is also for sale.) We are <br />requesting that these variances be denied. <br />A brief history of this lot is as follows: <br />1. This property (lot 18) was originally held in common with the two lots to the north <br />(lots 16 and 17), which are now combined. <br />2. The LR-IC zoning district was created in 1967, establishing the requirements tor <br />buildable lots. <br />3. The lot was sold off from lots 16 and 17 in 1977. <br />4. In 1983, lot width/lol area variances were granted for the lot. <br />5. Subsequently, Mr Remien bought the property and informed his neighbors that his <br />intent was twofold: to keep anyone from building on the land, and to put an addition <br />onto his current home. <br />6. Now Mr. Remien wishes to sell both his current home on lot 19 and lot 18 as <br />separate parcels anJ leave the neighborhood. <br />It is our request that the current application for lot width/lot area variances be denied for the <br />following reasons: <br />1. Lot 18 is substantially substandard to the requirements of LR-IC. The 55 foot lot <br />width is far below the 100 foot width requirement of LR-IC. In addition, it is not <br />consistent with even the narrowest lots in the neighborhood, being ne;u-ly 10% <br />narrower than any others. The area is only 77% of the required half acre size. <br />2. Increased hardcover on this particular lot would e.xacerbate an already serious <br />erosion problem that is occuring on lots 14, 15. 16, 17, and 18. In particular, we <br />would encourage the Planning Commission to e.xamine the hillside erosion problem <br />that is ver>' evident on the north side of Mr. Remien’s property.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.