05-13-1991 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

s. ht: I.r I i p.- i; li:-I-f''.' I■4.. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIu 22, 1991 («3)ZONING FILE #1497-TOBERMAN CONTINUED signature on the Waiver will be in regard this property. to anv new owners of Barrett replied. "The Land Use Statutes in Minnesota allow, and in fact require, us to file Conditional Use Permits against the land. We have also provided that the VJaiver, which Mr. Toberman would sign, would be filed with the Conditional Use Permit. To that extent, any subsequent purchaser is on notice of the condition." It was moved by Butler, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2953, and accept the changes that have been made by the applicant's attorney. Motion, Ayes-3, Mayor Peterson, Callahan. Nay. Motion passed. (|4)ZONIHG PILE #1629-MCNULTY CONSTRUCTION 1700 FOX STREET VARIANCE James McNulty, Hugh MacMillan, Duncan MacMillan Taylor, Attorney, were present. and Jack gei^nhardson stated that based on action taken by Council at their April 8, 1991, meeting, a denial resolution is being presented for Council's review this evening. He noted that the City Attorney’s office had only a brief opportunity to review this resolution, and suggested that Council may wish to table this matter. Mayor Peterson asked Jack Taylor if he would like Council to table or proceed with this application. Taylor stated that his clients would prefer to proceed, and he asked for the opportunity to make a few brief statements. He said, "Thsre are three factors l would ask Council to consider. First, the City has adopted no policy with respect to lot coverage for a principal residence on lots exceeding two acres. As was the case in 1987, a.nd is still true today, these improvements could have been made to the principal structure. In 1987, Council did find sufficient hardship to merit approval of the Variances requested. I believe those hardships, set forth in Resolution #2204, still exist today. Based on the 1937 approval, the applicant constructed the building in accordance with the requirements and conditions. What we now have, as applied to this Variance, is a piece of property and improvements that comply with the Zoning Ordinance. Based on the action taken by Council in 1987, and what the applicant agreed to in 1987, with regard to restrictions, this property is now truly unique. The accessory building has been operational for two years, and there have been no adverse consequences to the neighborhood. We feel these factors need to be considered by Council when they make their decision. - 6 -