11-12-2019 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________________ 3 b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The plight of the property owner is due to the existing substandard lot size and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The character of the neighborhood is not likely to be significantly altered from replacement of the residence 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 use for a single family home is an allowed use in the LR-1A 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 size of the lot with in the LR-1A zoning district is unique for the requested lot width, lot area and setback variances. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The size of the lot and its locations as it pertains to the existing zoning district is peculiar to the property 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The Commission should discuss whether the front and rear yard setback is necessary to support property rights. 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 of the requested variances would not impair health, safety, comfort or morals and would be in keeping with the intent of the zoning code 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The application has stated the shallow lot has setback challenges for construction of a single family home. The property is unique in size for this zoning district. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS: