My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
2008-015 Council Resolution
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
2008
>
2008-015 Council Resolution
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/16/2021 8:49:50 PM
Creation date
9/3/2014 10:22:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Master List Resolution
Meeting Date
01/28/2008
Council Meeting Type
Regular
Resolution #
08-15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
U �o u � eco cAe <br /> Council Member Gallup introduced the following resolution and moved <br /> its adoption: <br /> CITY OF LINO LAKES <br /> RESOLUTION NO. 08-15 <br /> RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO THE DETACHED ACCESSORY <br /> STRUCTURE SETBACK FOR THE PROPERTY AT 2221 REILING ROAD. <br /> WHEREAS, the City has received an application for a Variance to allow an existing <br /> detached accessory structure to remain at 2221 Reiling Road, described as follows: <br /> Lots 11 and 12, Otter Lake Hills, Lino Lakes <br /> and; <br /> WHEREAS, the zoning ordinance requires a 5 foot side setback for detached accessory <br /> structures; and <br /> WHEREAS, the property owner constructed a detached accessory structure that is 4.29 <br /> feet from the side property line; and <br /> WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Planning & Zoning Board on January <br /> 9, 2008; and <br /> WHEREAS, as required by Section 2, Subdivision 4 of the zoning ordinance, the City <br /> Council made the following findings of fact regarding the structure: <br /> a. That the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used <br /> under conditions allowed by the official controls. <br /> Reasonable use of the garage, which was permitted, constructed, and <br /> inspected at what was believed to be the appropriate setback; would be <br /> eliminated if the setback was strictly enforced in this case. <br /> b. That the plight of the landowners is due to physical circumstances unique <br /> to his property not created by the landowner. <br /> Due to the topography of the lot,the location of the rear property corner is <br /> extremely difficult to ascertain and verify. At the time of the building permit <br /> for the structure, no survey was required and the property owner believed he <br /> was meeting the setback requirement. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.