My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12-10-1984 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1984
>
12-10-1984 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/3/2025 2:40:19 PM
Creation date
11/3/2025 2:27:49 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
376
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City of ORONO <br />RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COI!'NCIL <br />NO. <br />variance to lot area would establish a negative precedent in the <br />future development of the Minnetonka Summit Park neighborhood. A <br />review of the ownership pattern of the remaining vacant lots <br />reveals one, two lot combination and three, single lots. <br />19. The standards and intent of both the City's Zoning Code and <br />Community Management Plan would no longer have any effect if the <br />City establishes a precedent of approving variances of this <br />degre,. The LR-lB Zoning District alone contains 88 vacant lots, <br />34 or 39% of these fall within 20-40 percent of the required <br />are . The findings cited in each of the variance applications <br />reviewed in this resolution presented unique circumstances. In <br />review of similar criteria, what is unique about Fisk's request <br />in consideration of the following facts: <br />a) A previous fee owner failed to amend the variance <br />application of 1977 and acquire additional lots at the <br />time they were available. <br />b) There is no structure on the property. The previous <br />-(>sidence was razed in 1976 and had not been in use since <br />the mid 1950's. <br />c) A two lot building site is not consistent with current <br />pattern of neighborhood development. The smallest <br />building site approved since 1975 totaled .52 acres, but <br />that lot had an additional 12,000 sf of land separated or <br />divided by an unimproved public road. <br />d) The property was not assessed a full sewer unit because <br />the property was substandard in 1973 when the sewer <br />district was established. The intent of the sewer <br />assessment policy has been stated for the public record - <br />one quarter unit for each vacant, substandard lot. <br />e) The question of the <br />code standards prior <br />to the city appears <br />fol lowing facts: <br />applicant's knowledge of the zoning <br />to application for a building permit <br />questionable in consideration of the <br />L" <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.