Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />• <br />n <br />LJ <br />in the yard regulations for the district in which such lot <br />is located. <br />31.410 <br />Reduction Prohibited. No yard or other open space <br />shall be reduced in areas or dimensions so as to make such <br />yard or other open space less than the minimum required by <br />the Zoning Code and if the existing yard or other space as <br />existing is less than the minimum required, it shall not be <br />further reduced. <br />24. The front yard in the lakeshore property as decided <br />by the Minnesota Supreme Court in the case of Girvan v. County <br />of LeSueur, 232 N.W.2d 888 (1975) and as applied by the City <br />of Orono, is the yard adjacent to the lake. <br />25. The proposed subdivision, if approved, would result <br />in two substandard lots abutting on Casco Cove. Each lot must <br />have a minimum lakeshore frontage width of 100 feet. The pro- <br />posed lots have only 50 feet of lakeshore frontage. The <br />Planning Commission and City Council require that there be <br />100 feet of lot width at both the building location and the <br />lakeshore. Other subdividers have been denied variances to <br />reduce the number of feet from the minimum on the lakeshore <br />in a manner similar to Mr. Braun's application. <br />26. Variances may only be granted to the above regula- <br />tions only pursuant to §32.300 through 32.371 of the Orono <br />Zoning Code. <br />27. Mr. Braun has not applied for any of the above <br />variances. Even if Mr. Braun had applied for the variances <br />or is deemed to have applied for the above variances, the <br />variances are denied for the reasons set forth herein: <br />(1) The granting of the variances would adversely <br />affect the purpose and intent of the Zoning Code and the wel- <br />fare of the public. <br />(2) There has been no request for variances referred <br />to the Planning Commission nor has there been a waiver of the <br />requirement that the Planning Commission review any proposed <br />variances pursuant to §32.330. <br />(3) The Planning Commission after having heard all of <br />the testimony and reviewed the staff reports, has recommended <br />denial of the proposed subdivision and any variance, if one <br />is applied for. <br />-5- <br />