My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-27-1998 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
1998
>
04-27-1998 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/26/2012 4:14:08 PM
Creation date
9/26/2012 4:14:08 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING • <br />MINUTES FOR APRIL 27,1998 <br />( #14) John Dalbec Request for Council Determination Regarding the Keeping of Horses at 30 <br />Orono Orchard Road North - Continued <br />Jabbour explained how the ordinances work. Prior to ordinances being adopted, property owners <br />could do whatever activities they wanted legally. When they continue to do these activities after <br />they are no longer allowed by ordinance, it is considered legally non - conforming. If the activity <br />began after the ordinance was adopted, then it is illegally non - conforming. When an activity is <br />legally non - conforming, it is referred to as "grandfathered in ". Gaffron agreed that the keeping of <br />horses on this property is legally non - conforming. <br />Dalbec asked for clarification of legally, non - conforming. Jabbour explained that when horses were <br />on this property many years ago, it was legal to have horses there. <br />Gaffron referred to the staff review represented in a 6 page letter to Dalbec. Staff concluded that <br />there has been a continuous existence of horses on the property, and therefore the use should be <br />allowed to continue. No pollution problem exists as indicated in the report from Jeremy Geske of <br />the University of Minnesota. After two site inspections, Gaffron also concluded that no <br />environmental problems were created as a result of the horses. The fact that the property is less than <br />4 acres is not a factor in the decision to allow the horses to remain because they have been there . <br />continuously. Nothing in the information in the City's files suggest that there was any intent on the <br />City or the property owner's part to not have horses. The horse barn and corral were allowed to <br />remain when there was no house on the property. Horses have been on the property since at least <br />the mid- 1950's. <br />Jabbour asked how many hours staff has spent on this issue. Gaffron responded that he had spent <br />at least 25 hours, and probably another 10 or 15 hours with other staff members and the City <br />Attorney. No members of the Council or Planning Commission have been involved in researching <br />the issues. <br />Jabbour informed Dalbec that the City has concluded that the horses are a legally, non - conforming <br />use of the property. Many taxpayer dollars have been spent to reach this conclusion. There has been <br />no interference from the Council or Planning Commission. If there is any bias, it is toward Dalbec <br />since so much time has been spent to research the issue. <br />Flint questioned the ownership of the property. Gaffron confirmed that Murphy /Smith own Lots 10 <br />and 13, and Dalbec owns Lot 12. Flint noted a supportive letter from Mrs. Bordson, a neighbor to <br />the north. He also asked what would happen if one of the lots were sold off. Gaffron responded that <br />Lot 10 is 3.7 acres and Lot 13 is 1.5 acres. <br />12 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.