06-17-2019 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

LA19-000038 June 17,2019 Page 3 of 4 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed variance to expand the home on a nonconforming lot of record is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; the request to permit construction of the additions to the home on the substandard lot, in the proposed location within the front setback, appears to be somewhat reasonable as the property's reduced size and depth and 75' creek setback create difficulties. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; the uniquely small size and depth, and required setbacks prevent a reasonable residential footprint. and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The some of other properties in the neighborhood have similar setback challenges, the subject property will not be out of character with the neighborhood. Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn.Stat. § 216C.06,subd. 2,when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78.This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is not applicable, as the single family home is an allowed use in the RR-1B District. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling.This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The property has an extremely limiting building envelope. The front setback and creek setback overlap for much of the lot leaving an small triangle building area towards to south end of the property. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The property is substandard is area and is has overlapping setbacks in the front and rear yard. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Staff finds this to be true. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the variance does not imminently threaten health,safety,or morals. . 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty.The variance for the front yard setback in necessary,and do not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant.Other locations impact the creek yard, or side yard setbacks,which impacts massing. The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances.