Laserfiche WebLink
,,".. <br /> „ , . <br /> � <br /> • Resolution No., 771_ <br /> RESOLUTION DENYING LOT AREA VARIANCE <br /> AND LOT WIDTH VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY <br /> LOCATED AT 140 CYGNET PLACE, LOT 2, <br /> BLOCK 3�, SWAN LAKE ADDITION <br /> WHEREAS, Lou Warden is the owner of property located at <br /> 140 Cygnet Place, Orono, Minnesota, (also known as Lot 2) , and <br /> has applied for lot area and lot width variances, and <br /> WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the application <br /> for the two variances and have recommended denial of same, and <br /> WHEREAS, the City Staff has reviewed the application for <br /> two variances and has recommended denial of same, and <br /> WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Planning <br /> Commission recommendation, the City Staff recommendation and <br /> the comments related thereto by Mr. Warden and City Staff at <br /> a council meeting of April 11, 1977, <br /> WHEREAS, the City Council conceptually denied the applica- <br /> • tion on April 11, 1977, and requested staff to set forth the <br /> reason for the denial stated by the council for subsequent <br /> council review and ratification, <br /> NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council has reviewed the Planning <br /> Commission recommendation, the City Staff recommendation and the <br /> comments related thereto by Mr. Warden and City Staff at a coun- <br /> cil meeting of April 11, 1977,. <br /> WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed this resolution to <br /> determine its accuracy, <br /> NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Orono <br /> denies the application for lot area and lot width variances <br /> based upon the following findings of fact: <br /> l. The realtor submitting the application on behalf of <br /> Mr. Warden for variances misrepresented the facts of the matter <br /> when he stated that Lot 2 could not be expanded as the property on <br /> either side already contained a house, neither of which was owned <br /> by the owner of Lot 2. <br /> 2. Mr. Warden owns Lot 2 and lives in and owns a house <br /> that is on the adjacent Zot No. l. <br /> ,� 3. Lots 1 and 2 are therefore presently in common own- <br /> ership and have been in common ownership since the enactment of <br /> the current zoning ordinances. <br />