My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-16-2016 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2016
>
02-16-2016 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/18/2019 2:23:27 PM
Creation date
8/25/2016 9:13:01 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
356
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
l0.When this property was purchased, the current owner was informed that the <br /> LR 1A standards would apply and that the side yard setbacks were in fact 30'. <br /> Requiring a 45' side yard setback would significandy duninish the enjoyrnent of <br /> a substantial pzoperty ri�ht of the applicant. <br /> 11.The proposed variance will not be contrary to any intent of the zoning code <br /> and will instead bring it into conformity with the other neighbc�ring properties. <br /> 12.The vatiance would allow the applicant to have an $6'wide conforrnuig <br /> building pad width versus the demonst�able difficultp presented by a 56' wide <br /> building pad—created by the 45' side yard setbacks of the back lot standards. <br /> Statement <br /> I have attached an aerial photo of the very dpsfunction and undesirable cul de sac. <br /> The removal o£this cul de sac was the purpose of the re-platt'tng approved over 20 <br /> years ago, per Resolution #3652 and #3653. The unique findings noted in Resolution <br /> #3652 included the followi.ng. <br /> 1. Reduction of hardcopp by 2,033 sq. ft <br /> 2. Decrease run of£of salts and oils direcdy into werlands and the lake. <br /> 3. This was t�e only 3 fa.mily cul de sac in Orono that drained into Lake <br /> Minnetonka and bp revegetating would slow down the dra.inage into the lake. <br /> 4. This cul de sac attracted strangers looking for access to the lake. Removing it <br /> would decrease traffic on Noxth Shore Drive. <br /> 5. All property owners and neighbors supported the removaL <br /> 6. The narm along North Shore Drive is si.ngle and double drivewaps, not 3 <br /> family cul de sacs. <br /> 7. This was the only cul de sac that�rono considered�removing in rhe previous <br /> 20 years. <br /> 8. There would be no longer a city egpense to maintain the street and cul de sac. <br /> 9. Removal of the public st�eet would make the area safer for chilclren, provide <br /> increased security for the e�isting homes and ixnprove the esthetic view from <br /> the la.ke. <br /> The City of Orono's findings at the time were very clear that the �emoval. of this <br /> unnecessarily large and obtrusive cul de sac was mutually benefieial to the City, <br /> property owners and neighbors. It is also very clear that the purpose of Resolutions <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.