My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-18-2019 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2019
>
03-18-2019 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2019 9:25:48 AM
Creation date
3/19/2019 9:25:30 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
148
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
FILE#LA19-000007 <br /> 18 March 2019 <br /> Page 3 of 5 <br /> the average lakeshore and 75-foot setbacks); a new 462 square foot patio is proposed on the <br /> first floor level in the southeast corner of the home.Variances for setback are required due to <br /> the increase in mass within the existing nonconforming footprint.The 75-foot hardcover <br /> variance is relating to the new patio hardcover and location. <br /> The proposed hardcover level of 24.9% reflects a 155 square foot overall increase from the <br /> existing conditions;while this falls within the hardcover limits, 266 square feet additional <br /> hardcover is proposed in the 75-setback due to the proposed, larger patio.The proposed home <br /> is 896 square feet larger than the existing home. Building coverage is proposed at 12%;the <br /> applicant is not maximizing the proposed building coverage. <br /> Governing Regulation:Variance(Section 78-123) <br /> In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the <br /> proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and <br /> anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect <br /> on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider <br /> recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances <br /> where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique <br /> to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is <br /> demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning <br /> Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties <br /> also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. <br /> Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, <br /> subd. 2,when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a <br /> variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the <br /> affected person's land is located.The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary <br /> use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. <br /> According to MN §462.537 Subd. 6(2)variances shall only be permitted when: <br /> 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The <br /> proposed variances are in harmony with the purpose of the Ordinance.The lot <br /> includes difficulties in its substandard size and width, location of adjacent homes, and <br /> the existing home's proximity to the lake.The average lakeshore setback variance will <br /> not further impact views of the lake for adjacent properties. <br /> 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed variances to <br /> develop a nonconforming lot of record are consistent with the comprehensive plan. <br /> 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. <br /> a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not <br /> permitted by the official controls; The request to permit construction of the <br /> home on the substandard lot,in the proposed location within the lake and <br /> average lakeshore setbacks, appears to be somewhat reasonable as the <br /> applicant is proposing to build within the existing lakeside footprint,the <br /> property's nonconforming size, and the neighboring homes'orientation with <br /> respect to the lakeshore,and adjacent properties creates difficulties.The <br /> hardcover level,and building encroachments proposed within the lake yard <br /> and average lakeshore setback do not exceed existing setbacks and do not <br /> appear to be unreasonable. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.