10-29-1984 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

6- LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DAL'V & LINDGREN, LTD. Memorandum to Ms. Jeanne Mabusth and The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Orono City Council Page 2 October 24, 1984 These lots were caught in a rezoning "squeeze" and development rights occurred as of that moment, subject to their development not being in conflict with the health, safety or welfare of the community. The City Attorney opined that the purchase of tax forfeit property in no way, negates or diminishes the development rights which were implicit at the time of rezoning. Mi-. Fisk does not make practice of buying distressed property and intends to live in the home which will be built on this lot. Neighbors objections, not based on health, safety or welfare objections are not relevant. Mr. Fisk in good faith, listened to s-.me neighbors inquiries as to the sale of the property. Tentatively, the .leighbors offered $17,000, -ubject to the condition that the neighbors find acceptable financing. On the 27th of September, Mr. Fisk received another tentative proposal to buy the property for $8,500. Even this was "subject to negotiation." Needless to say- this tactic was used to further delay his preparation for the upcoming City Council meeting. C. Uniqueness of the Property The Zoninq Administrator and the Planning Staff have rendered positive opinion., as to the uniqueness of this property. The provision of a sewer stub, the fact that a home has been lived in on the property and that it is a corner lot (which negates the need for ceth—ack variances) ill speal" to th-? uniqueness of the property denial of a variance denies Mr. Fisk "all use of the proi:artv," the uniqueness test is more than satisfied. D. Consistent with the regulations of Orono and Pealth, Safetv Welfare The Fisk's variance application is consistent with the Orono Ordinances, the standards used by Orono in the pa..t, the policies of Orono and the overwhelming number of variances previously granted. In the most recent Minnesota variance case to date, Arnold Palme- v. The City of Plymouth (1984), the District Court stated that a varij-ice must be granted if the City acting under the authority of its zoning ordinance has over a period of years granted variances under circumstances substantially the same as