Laserfiche WebLink
. -. <br /> �•��r,�'' ,V����� C�� of ORONO <br /> ..{ � � <br /> • a ` <br /> ._ Y MY � .rY ; . <br /> .w Q "'�v,�-4 , �+,�8�, : <br /> �',, ,�;,� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> '� 2606 <br /> ��� Y,� x ° NO. <br /> • _ �'� <br /> ar` ,���;` <br /> • • • • � <br /> •.x:: <br /> A RESOLDTION GRANTING <br /> A VARIANCE TO <br /> MITNICIPAL ZONING CODE <br /> SECTION 10.27, SIIBDIVISION 5 (B) <br /> FILE #1378 <br /> WH$REAS, Kamil Ugurbil (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner <br /> of the property located at 4605 Watertown Road within the City of Orono <br /> (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: <br /> Lot l, Block 1, McCulley Farm, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter <br /> "the property"); and <br /> WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a <br /> variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.27, Subdivision 5 (B) to <br /> permit the construction of an addition to the existing residence located <br /> 35'7" from the west side property line instead of the required 50' setback. <br /> • Variance sought by applicant is 14 '15" or 30�. <br /> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, <br /> Minnesota: <br /> FINDINGS <br /> 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1378. <br /> 2.. The property is located in the RR-lA Single Family Rural <br /> Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 5 acres and 300' of <br /> width. The progerty consists of 5+ acres and 420' of width to the <br /> rear of the front yard setback line as required by code. <br /> 3. The Orono Council reviewed this app lication on March 13, 1989, and <br /> recommended conceptual approval of the proposed variance based upon <br /> the following findings and hardships noted be the app licant: <br /> A) Expansion at the north side of the existing residence would <br /> create the following hardships: <br /> i. The proposed layout of existing and proposed room <br /> locations would not relate to the kitchen on the north side <br /> of the house. <br /> � ii. The addition would be placed closer to the busy County <br /> Road. <br /> " Page 1 of 5 <br />