My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 2304
Orono
>
Resolutions, Ordinances, Proclamations
>
Resolutions
>
Reso 0001-7399
>
Reso 2300 - 2399 (November 23, 1987 - March 28, 1988)
>
Resolution 2304
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/21/2016 1:28:06 PM
Creation date
6/21/2016 1:28:06 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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 /> - , <br /> . ., <br /> ,.:, <br /> � Clt� of ORONO <br /> • t <br /> ,i, � RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> � ,� : NO. 2 30 4 <br /> ' • • • • <br /> A RESOLUTION GRAYJTING <br /> A VARIAIdCE TO <br /> MDNICIPAL ZOIIIPTG CODE <br /> S]3CTION 10.28, SDBDIVISION 5 (B) <br /> FILE #1209 <br /> WHl3R�3AS, Mark & Tina White (hereinafter "the applicants") are the <br /> owners of the property located at 2150 Prospect Avenue within the City of <br /> Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: <br /> Exhibit A attached (hereinafter "the property" ) ; and <br /> WH�R$AS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to <br /> Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the <br /> construction of a solarium addition located 8.4' from the side lot line <br /> where a 30 ' side setback is normally required. <br /> iJOW, TH$REFORE, BE IT RBSOLVED by the City Council of Orono, <br /> Minnesotas <br /> • FINDINGS ' <br /> 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1209. <br /> 2. The property is located in the RR-1B Single Family Rural <br /> Residential Zoning District. <br /> 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on <br /> November 16, 1987, and recommended approval of the proposed variance <br /> based upon the following findings: <br /> A) Based on the layout of the existing house and the location of <br /> the house, there is no other suitable location that would not <br /> require a variance. <br /> B) The existing porch to be removed is in disrepair and <br /> construction of this solarium in its place wil 1 be a significant <br /> improvement to the property. <br /> , <br /> C ) The 8.4 ' setback on just the main level will not <br /> significantly encroach on light, air or open space in the <br /> neighborhood. <br /> 4. 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 applicant and the effect of the proposed <br /> variance on the hea 1 th, saf ety and we 1 f are of the community. <br /> Page 1 of 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.