#4660-denying/granting variances-2001

Home Browse Search

/ Q '� '�. � � ��, CITY of ORONO � � ti ti RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ��kE �I04��'G NO. 4 6 � 0 �� value of the land and the integriri�. �tabilit�- and beauty of the community." 15. The Council finds that the granting of lot area and lot width variances for Lot 7 would be inappropriate because allowing construction of a residence on the lot would not be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Chapter and the LR-1B District,and would not meet the necessary Statutory findings of"unduz hardship" required to grant such a variance, as follows: a) "The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used by under conditions allowed by the official controls." The property in question can be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. Continued use as lake access for 1 I69 I�orth Arm Drive and for dock use, as has occurred for the past 30 years or lor_Jer, is a reasonable use of this�•ery substandard lot. The City will approve the nece:_ary Spzcial Lot Combination to allow said past use to continue. This owner and p�t o��ners have enjoyed a substantial benefit of Lot 7 for many years by using it for lake access purposes. b) "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to this property not created by the landowner." The F?i�ht ot the landowner is that the lot historically used as lake access for 1169 North_�rm Dri��e is extremely substandard in area and width as compared to the standard�of the LR-1B zoning district. This condition is not unique to this property,as man�-such lots were platted many decades ago before zoning standards were in effect.In many cases along the shoreline of Forest Lake Bay of Lake Minnetonka,two or more substandard lots have been combined in order to more closely meet the LR-1B star.3ards. In this case, the lando��ner had ample opportunity to view the histon� of variance denials for the property prior to purchasing Lot 7 and 1169 North �rm Dri�-e together. The property owner should have had every expectation that such denials would be upheld considering that the zoning district lot area and width standards have not changed since those denials. c) "The variances, if granted, ��ill not alter the essential character of the neighborhood." Granting of the�-ariances�vould alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Construction of a residence on such a substandard lot would create additional development density not in character with the existing nei jhborhood. The Page � of 7 .