Laserfiche WebLink
MINITPES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />HELD NOVEMBER 22, 1993 <br />m) /^1860 ZELMA McKINNEY, 3599 LIVINGSTON AVENUE - CONT. <br />City Attorney Staunton responded that in this conditional use permit, the duplex use would <br />remain regardless of ownership. He noted that the use must remain the same as that prior to <br />the change in Zoning Code. If the Council determines the use has been continuous, the <br />conditional use permit is a mechanism for registering with the City the duplex use of this <br />property. <br />Hurr asked if there was any time frame for a property to be brought into compliance with City <br />ccxles. City Attorney Staunton confirmed there was nothing in the code. The only way the <br />conditional use permit would lapse i.s if there was a significant change such as the building being <br />destroyed, the use abandoned or significant change in the non-conforming nature of the use. <br />Mabusth added that now the application for a building pennii for multiple units in a single <br />family zoning district would trigger the application for a conditional use pennit. <br />Hurr asked if this were being assessed as two units. Mabusth noted the applicant was receiving <br />a percentage of the homestead credit because of the rental unit. Siegler thought Hennepin <br />County was listing the property as a multiple use but Orono lists as single family. <br />Jabbour noted the idea of willful abandonment should be considered. <br />Mike Swanson, 3596 Lyric Avenue, stated that if the driveway were constructed off of Blaine <br />in back of his property, it would impact his property and cause a problem when he puts up a <br />garage. He has concern over the sale of the property if Mrs. McKinney no longer lives there. <br />An absentee owner could be much different. <br />Elizabeth Goodfellow, 3585 Livingston Avenue, stated there were several issues that were <br />unclarificd. <br />1. Can the City lawfully issue a conditional use pennit? <br />2. Parking - The City’s orUinan>:es require additional p.irking in order for this <br />property to be used as a duplex She felt there was not a reasonable answer to <br />the parking problem, therefore the conditional use permit should not be granted. <br />Vt>ne of the neighbors want »he pail ing expanded. She asked how the Council <br />could justify granting a conditional use permit when the parking needs were not <br />satisfied. <br />Harvey Reder, 3598 Livingston Avenue, asked if the Council would consider three parking <br />.spaces instead of four as he had suggested at a previous meeting.