My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 2198
Orono
>
Resolutions, Ordinances, Proclamations
>
Resolutions
>
Reso 0001-7399
>
Reso 2100 - 2199 (December 8, 1986 - June 8, 1987)
>
Resolution 2198
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/28/2016 3:09:34 PM
Creation date
4/28/2016 3:09:34 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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).
View images
View plain text
�� <br /> ^, ' e . <br /> � Ci.t� o� ORONO <br /> •� RESOI.UTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> � NO. 219 8 <br /> � � <br /> ' • � • • <br /> A RESOLDTION GRANTING <br /> A VARIANCE TO <br /> MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE <br /> SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 15 (C) � <br /> ' FILE �1147 <br /> � WHEREAS, George & Theresa Bloom (hereinafter "the applicants" ) <br /> are the owners of the property located at 1374 Rest Point Road within the <br /> � City of Oronb (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: <br /> Lot l, Block 1, Rest Point, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter <br /> "the property"); and <br /> WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance <br /> to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (C) to permit the <br /> construction of a fence 6' in height along a front property line where only <br /> a 3�' height fence is normally allowed. <br /> • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, <br /> Minnesota: <br /> FINDINGS <br /> l. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1147. <br /> 2. The property is located in the LR-1B Single Family Lakeshore <br /> Residential Zoning District. <br /> 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 18, <br /> 1987, and none of their 3 motions for recommended action (2 for <br /> conditional approval, 1 for denial) yielded a majority of votes, hence <br /> Planning Commission could reach no formal recommendation on this <br /> project. <br /> 4. The Council finds that the proposed 6' fence to be located as <br /> described in the conditions of this resolution are necessary for the <br /> applicants' enjoyment of their property, the hardship being the close <br /> proximity of the actual traveled. roadway to the existing residence, a <br /> distance of less than 20' , and the elevations of the windows in the <br /> . :. � . resid:ence at the .same relative : level as e.ye. level of; pedestrian and <br /> vehicular traffic on the roadway. The Council finds that the existing <br /> shrubbery does not provide adequate screening to protect the <br /> applicants' privacy, and finds that evergreen shubbery could not be <br /> suitably developed in its place. . <br /> • 5� The City Council has considered this application including the <br /> findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by <br /> City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed <br /> variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. <br /> Page 1 of 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.