My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 1711
Orono
>
Resolutions
>
Reso 0001-7499
>
Reso 1700 - 1799 (November 26, 1984 - July 8, 1985)
>
Resolution 1711
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2016 3:25:50 PM
Creation date
3/10/2016 3:25:50 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
. „t _ <br /> . � V�,�� <br /> ��� � <br /> ��� Cit� o� ORONO <br /> • �.��r��t-� : ., <br /> , � RESOWTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> ` 1711 <br /> �`,'����,. � NO. <br /> ,:•. . ,'.,y <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 /> degree. The LR-1B Zoning District alone contains 88 vacant lots, <br /> � 34 or 39% of these fall within 201-4�1 percent of the required <br /> area. 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 /> residence was razed in 1976 and had not been in use since <br /> the mid 196P1 ' 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 12,9100 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 applicant's knowledge of the zoning <br /> � code standards prior to application for a building permit <br /> • to the� city appears que.stionable in consideration of the <br /> � following facts: <br /> o� <br /> 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.