Laserfiche WebLink
� <br /> � <br /> , : �• <br /> X° �t <br /> ' iir:�y^ <br /> r <br /> _ � �� `��` Cit� o� ORONO . <br /> ,t�� �` ,, ;.: <br /> . ���� . <br /> • �^�� � � `��'' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> �.: <br /> �. � p,;.�� NO. 2786 <br /> T� � <br /> .� • •* � <br /> .t . �;: ;r� <br /> �`�t*�.�� ' . <br /> A RESOLIITION GRANTING VARIANCES <br /> TO MIINICIPAL ZONING CODE <br /> SECTION 10.22, SIIBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2, AND <br /> SECTION 10.55, SIIBDIVISION 8, <br /> GRANTING A CONDITIONAL IISE PERMIT PER <br /> � SECTION 10.03, SIIBDIVISION 19 <br /> FILE #1468 <br /> WHEREAS, George and Sally Pillsbury (hereinaftez "the <br /> applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1300 <br /> Bracketts Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter <br /> "City") and legally described on Exhibit A attached (hereinafter <br /> the "property") ; and <br /> WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the <br /> City of Orono for variances to (a) Municipal Zoning Code Section <br /> 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2, (b) Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to <br /> construct a greenhouse addition and a retaining wall .within the <br /> � 0-75 ' lakesho�e setback zone , resulting in sturcture and <br /> hardcover in the 0-75' zone where no structure or hardcover is <br /> normal ly allowed, and which greenhouse addition encroaches past <br /> the defined average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment <br /> is normally allowed, and further (c) requesting a conditional use <br /> permit for grading work within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone <br /> per Section 10. 03, Subdivision 19 . <br /> ' NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of <br /> Orono, Minnesota: <br /> � FINDINGS <br /> l. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1468 . <br /> 2. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed the <br /> application October 16, 1989 and recommended approval of the <br /> proposed variances and conditional use permit on a vote of 5-2, <br /> based on the following findings: � <br /> A). The average lakeshore setback encroachment wil 1 <br /> � not impair any existing lake views enjoyed by <br /> neighboring pzopexty owners. <br /> B) . The retaining wall and associated grading <br /> proposed at the top of the lakeshore bank is <br /> • necessazy for preservation of the lakeshore bank, <br /> which is currently exhibiting some slumping effect. <br />