Laserfiche WebLink
15. The City Council reviewed the application on March 10, 1986, <br />tabling it until April 14, 1986 fc: final action. On April 14, 1986, <br />the City Council directed staff to draft a resolution of denial based <br />on the following findings: <br />a) The extent of the variances requested is excessive for the <br />RR-lB zoning district. <br />b) Given the history of septic system problems in the City of <br />Orono and surrounding Lake Minnetonka, a density of 3 septic <br />systems on 2.9 acres in a district where 6 acres is required for <br />3 septic systems, is excessive. <br />c) Because the property is currently used as conforming <br />residential building site, the applicant would not be deprived of <br />a reasonable use of the property. <br />d) Applicant has not demonstrated sufficient hardships to <br />justify granting of the requested variances. <br />At the April 14, 1986 Council meeting the applicant noted his attorney <br />could not be present at the meeting. The applicant was asked if he <br />wished to have the matter tabled until his attorney was present. <br />Applicant waived his right to have his attorney present. <br />16. The applicant maintains that he divided the property in 1958-59 <br />at the request of then Mayor Herb Ross. Because the zoning code <br />adopted in 1950 allowed only one residence per building lot, Mayor <br />Ross would have been legally bound to require that a division be <br />completed in order to allow the new house which was permitted in 1958. <br />17. The applicant maintains that the property was divided in a manner <br />such that new homes could be built on each of Parcels 2 and 3 <br />according to City codes at the time of division. In fact, Parcel '2 <br />does not and never did contain the 1 acre in area required under <br />previous zoning of the property. <br />18. The applicant has provided soil testing, proposed septic system <br />designs, and proposed site plans for each of Parcels 2 and 3 which <br />indicate that technically, septic systems can be provided to serve a <br />residence on each of Parcels 2 and 3, meeting the required sanitary <br />setbacks. However, technical feasibility is not the only criteria <br />considered by the City in reviewing variance applications, and in this <br />case and other similar cases, the City has also con-idered, as a <br />matter of policy, the potential adverse effect of higher density <br />housing on the quality of Lake Minnetonka and the potential adverse <br />effect on the general health, safety, and welfare. <br />Page 5 of 9 <br />