Laserfiche WebLink
O O� <br />\kLt'SH�4/ <br />CITY of ORONO <br />RESOLUTION OF IME �C�ITY COUNCIL <br />NO. 3 <br />A. 'The .xisting residence to be removed is non-conformim! in that it is less <br />than 30' from the side lot line and less than 75' from the shoreline of <br />Lake Minnetonka. Further. the existing hardcover on the property is <br />excessive as compared to the hardcover limits imposed by the Orono <br />7_onina Code. <br />B. "rhe existing residence will be removed and will be replaced by a new <br />residern:e structure including decks, sidewalks and drive%vay, all of which <br />meet the 75' lakeshore setback. 30' side setbacks and 25% hardcover limit <br />within the 75-250' zone. The propcsed site plan meets these requirements <br />within the confines of the existing substandard area and width lot. Thy <br />}property. while in a 3 acre zone. is provicidd with ntunicipal sewer which <br />eliminates anv coneerns about septic system needs. <br />C The curved shoreline configuration results in the need for an average <br />lakeshore setback encroachment of 13' by the house and 19' by the decks. <br />Neither of the adjacent residence structures will have existing views of <br />the lake impacted by the proposed construction, and in fact their views <br />of the lake may be improved by removal of the existing house. <br />D. The City Engineer has reviewed and approved the proposed site gr: ding <br />and drainage plans. <br />4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and <br />recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff. comments <br />b\ the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health. safety and <br />welfare of the community. <br />�. The Cite Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar <br />to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district: that <br />(.zrantins the variances %would not adversely affect traffic conditions. light. air nor <br />pose afire hazard or other danger to neighboring property, would not merel\ <br />serve as a convenience to the applicant. but is necessary to alleviate a <br />demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial <br />property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and <br />intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. <br />Pave 2 of 5 <br />