Resolution 2687 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

:, ,, xi x�rA C��Y o� ORONO � ar i '� V ',; _ �l% y r . • � y '' ��'� n d�' � e .�� �; � Q�� ; RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCI L .�� i �,.,rz�;� N O. 2 6 8 7 , . � �•••• - • • �3• _ ' i1�'- . . The applicant maintains that the property was divided such that new homes could be built on each of Parcels 2 and 3 according to City codes at the time of division. The exact date of the filing of the division has not been established. If it was prior to October 12, 1959, both Parcels 2 and 3 would have been conforming lots under the code in effect at that time. 20. The applicants have provided soil testing, proposed septic system designs, and proposed site plans for each of Parcels 2 and 3 which indicate that technically, primary and alternate drainfield sites can be provided to serve a residence on a combination of Parcels 2 and 3 meeting the � required sanitary setbacks. In reviewing variance applications, technical feasibility is one of the criteria considered by the City. The City also considers, as a matter of policy, the potential adverse effect of higher density housing on the quality of Lake Minnetonka and the potential adverse effect on the general health, safety and welfare. • 21. The applicant maintains that when the zoning was proposed to be changed f rom R-1C (1 acre) to RR-1B (2 acre) in 1974, he attended the public hearings and was told that his lots would stil 1 be buildable under the new zoning. This occurence has not been documented by the applicant, nor can it be verified by the City. Minutes of the public hearing indicate only general comments were made regarding existing lots of record. Regardless of what was said at those public hearings, the zoning code adopted by the City Council would be binding. 22. Mr. Ferrell was notified in writing by the City staff in 1981, upon inquiry, that under the current code, no building permits for a new house would be issued, and that no apparent basis existed for the granting of variances. 23. The 1984 zoing code currently in effect includes Section 10.03 , Subdivision 6 (C) which prohibits the "transfer or sale of non-conforming, undeveloped lots not served by public sanitary sewer, aligned in a continuous arrangement, undivided by a� public or private road or road easement and under the same or common ownership" unless specifically approved by the City Council, or unless the resulting lots satisfy the area and width requirements of the zoning code. No performance standards for approval of • such transfers appear in the code. Page 5 of 10