Laserfiche WebLink
FILE#LA19-000013 <br /> 15 April 2019 <br /> Page 3 of 4 <br /> 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The <br /> variances are minimal and generally consistent with the intent of the ordinance. This <br /> criterion is met. <br /> 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The requested variances are <br /> consistent with the residential goals within the comprehensive plan. This criterion is <br /> met. <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 minimal changes to the reconstructed <br /> lakeside deck lakeward of the average lakeshore setback are reasonable <br /> residential property.This criterion is met. <br /> b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; <br /> The property's orientation;the distance separation between the subject home <br /> and the neighboring homes; the existing trees separating the homes on either <br /> side combined with the elevation in relation to the lake result in a unique <br /> circumstance allowing for the decks to be almost completely screened from the <br /> adjacent homes; and <br /> c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The changes to <br /> the existing lakeside deck are minimal,will be generally screened from the <br /> neighboring homes, and will not adversely impact views of the lake from the <br /> neighboring homes.This condition is met. <br /> Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be <br /> granted as follows: <br /> 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic <br /> considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. <br /> 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight <br /> for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as <br /> defined in Minn.Stat. §216C.06,subd. 2,when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter <br /> 78.This condition is not applicable. <br /> 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under <br /> Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is <br /> located. This condition is not applicable, as residential decks are an allowed use in the <br /> LR-1B District. <br /> 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling <br /> as a two-family dwelling.This condition is not applicable. <br /> 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such <br /> property or immediately adjoining property.The home and decks are existing and there <br /> are mature property line trees and arborvitae which provide screening.The topography <br /> also situates the applicant's home and decks out of direct view of the neighbors, the <br /> decks will not adversely impact adjacent properties.This criterion is met. <br /> 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which <br /> the land is located.The applicant's proposal does not appear to be out of character with <br /> the area.This criterion is met. <br /> 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a <br /> substantial property right of the applicant.The applicant's request to rebuild the existing <br /> lakeside deck in a more functional footprint is reasonable and necessary.This statement <br /> is true. <br />