My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 3117
Orono
>
Resolutions, Ordinances, Proclamations
>
Resolutions
>
Reso 0001-7399
>
Reso 3100 - 3199 (March 23, 1992 - November 9, 1992)
>
Resolution 3117
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/19/2019 1:45:15 PM
Creation date
8/17/2016 1:05:53 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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 /> v. ON. <br /> O O <br /> == - CITY of ORONO <br /> i i 0 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> keswzA NO., 3117 <br /> 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on <br /> February 18, 1992 and April 20, 1992, and recommended <br /> approval of the variances as amended based upon the <br /> following findings: <br /> a) The 15' high lakeside banks shield the proposed deck <br /> from the views at lakeshore. <br /> b) The lakeside deck will not encroach the average <br /> lakeshore setback determined by the closest projections <br /> of the decks on the adjacent properties. <br /> c ) Location of view windows of applicant' s residence, <br /> location of mature trees within the side and lakeshore <br /> yard and location of a house to the immediate south are <br /> factors which limit the locating of deck on this <br /> property. <br /> d) The proposed deck will meet the Minnesota Department of <br /> Natural Resources 50' minimum setback for general <br /> development lake such as Lake Minnetonka. <br /> e ) Proposed detached garage shall encroach no closer <br /> within substandard street or side setbacks of current <br /> garage. <br /> 4 . The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this <br /> property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to <br /> other property in this zoning district; that granting the <br /> variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions , <br /> light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to <br /> neighboring property; would not merely serve as a <br /> convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate <br /> a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to <br /> preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and <br /> would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning <br /> Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. <br /> 5. The City Council has considered this application including <br /> the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, <br /> reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the <br /> effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and <br /> welfare of the community. <br /> Page 2 of 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.