Resolution 6544 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 6 544 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 6519 GRANTING SETBACK VARIANCES FROM ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 78-1279 FILE NO. 15-3738 WHEREAS, John Bowlsby and Cyndy Bowlsby, a married couple, (hereinafter "Applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1025 Spring Hill Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as attached in Exhibit A (hereinafter "the Property"); and WHEREAS, on June 22, 2015, the Council approved Resolution No, 6519 which granted lake setback variances in order to permit construction of additions on the lake side of the home within the 100 -foot setback from Long Lake and lakeward of the average lakeshore setback. Resolution No. 6519 also denied a variance to permit construction of a pool within the 75' setback and ahead of the average lakeshore setback. WHEREAS, the Applicants have requested an amendment to Resolution No. 6519 to allow modifications to eliminate the previously proposed larger addition on the west end of the home and construct a smaller addition in its place. Another 125 square foot addition is proposed which fills in a jog in the lakeside of the home to accommodate a kitchen bump out. Both additions are located entitrely lakeward of the average lakeshore setback and paritally ahead of the 100 -foot structural setback; and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the Orono, Minnesota, City Code, the Orono City Council held a public hearing on September 14, 2015, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. WHEREAS, The Council reviewed this application on September 14, 2015, and voted 5 to 0 to approve the amended variances for lake setback and average lakeshore setback to permit the additions and modifications to the lake side of the home according to the revised plans attached as Exhibits B & C. WHEREAS, the City Council's decision was based on the following findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the Applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community as well as the impact on properties in the vicinity.