Laserfiche WebLink
:� <br /> *���= d Cit of ORONO � <br /> � <br /> � RESOLUTION OF THE CiTY COUNCIL <br /> � <br /> �� NO. 2466 <br /> • � • • <br /> � A RESOLUTION GRAI�TING <br /> AN AFT$R-THS-FACT VARIANC$ TO <br /> MIINICIPAL ZONING COD� <br /> . : SECTION 10.61, SOBDIVISION 5 (A) , <br /> , FII.$ #1283 � <br /> WH$R$AS, Gary L. Escher and Beth Escher (hereinafter "the <br /> applicants") are the owners of the property Iocated at 3556 Livingston <br /> �•�� � ��Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter •"City") and legal ly described <br /> as Lots 20 and 21, Block 3, Navarre Heights, Hennepin County, Minnesota <br /> (hereinafter "the property"); and <br /> WHBR$AS, the applicants have applied to the City for an after- <br /> the-fact variance to Mun3.cipal Zoning Code Section 10.61, Subdivision 5 (A) <br /> to permit a storage addition to the existing garage constructed without the <br /> benefit of permit review, located 1/2' into the property located to the <br /> north instead of ineeting the required 10' setback from the rear lot line. <br /> NOW, TH$REFOR$, BB IT R$SOLVED by the City Council of Orono, <br /> • Minnesota: <br /> . FINDINGS <br /> •, <br /> 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1283. <br /> ,.; <br /> � 2. The property is located in the LR-1C Single Family Lakeshore <br /> Residential Zoning District requiring a 1/2 acre or 21,780 s.f. The <br /> sub ject property consists of 13,200 s.f. or .3 acres. <br /> 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 6, <br /> : 1988, and recommended approval of a rear setback variance subject to <br /> an amendment of the original plans submitted by applicant based upon <br /> '�� the following findings: <br /> -,; <br /> A) A storage addition that encroached the adjacent property to <br /> the north had existed on the property prior to the current <br /> . construction. <br /> d`� <br /> B) The original storage addition encroached the 10' required <br /> ; side yard setback along the east lot line. The new addition has <br /> been constructed so that _only a rear setback is required. <br /> . I <br /> # C) The addition to the rear of the existing garage allows the <br />�,A_} maximum use of the limited rear yard area. <br /> � <br /> .f• � 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 applicants and the ef£ect of the proposed <br /> °;�'� variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. <br />`��� Page 1 of 4 <br /> ��;� . <br />