Laserfiche WebLink
LA18-000091 <br />1.22.2019 <br />Page 2 of 4 <br /> <br />lot line. <br /> <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 /> <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. An A/C <br />unit in a nonconforming location is not in harmony with City Code. The intent of the <br />requirement (of not being placed in the side yard) is to separate the noise caused by the <br />unit and minimize the impact on the neighboring property. <br />2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The placement of the A/C unit <br />is accessory to the single family home on the property. The principle structure follows <br />the comprehensive plan, but placement of the A/C unit seems to be a convenience for <br />the property. <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 single family home is a reasonable use for <br />the property. The variance request for the A/C unit is a convenience to the <br />property owner when a reasonable conforming location is available in the rear <br />yard. <br />b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; <br />Staff find this not the be true. 4 other homes in addition to this address had <br />A/C units located in nonconforming locations. The other 4 properties were able <br />to move the units to meet City Code. and <br />c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance <br />will alter the character of the neighborhood by allowing the A/C unit within a <br />few feet of a property line and in a utility easement. <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