Laserfiche WebLink
LA20-000066 <br /> October 19,2020 <br /> Page 3 of 4 <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 the use for a residential home is an allowed <br /> conditional use in the 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 currently sits within the setback <br /> and the addition is not going to change the setback from the lake. <br /> 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which <br /> the land is located.The proposed addition will not change the current setbacks from the <br /> lake and meets all other zoning setback requirements.The location of the existing home <br /> is unique. <br /> 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a <br /> substantial property right of the applicant.The existing home can be re-built in kind,the <br /> proposed addition is necessary to permit the property owners continued enjoyment of <br /> their property.The addition is located in a location which serves the intent and goals of <br /> the ordinance by minimizing visual impacts to the lake. <br /> 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort <br /> or morals,or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter.The proposed <br /> project will not impair the health,safety,comfort, or morals of the public. <br /> 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but <br /> is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty.Granting of the variance will resolve and <br /> alleviate a demonstrated practical difficulty. <br /> The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. <br /> Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the <br /> impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use <br /> permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. <br /> Public Comments <br /> The Applicant submitted two emails from neighbors in support of the project. <br /> Issues for Consideration <br /> 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the <br /> property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? <br /> 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the <br /> essential character of the neighborhood? <br /> Planning Staff Recommendation <br /> Planning Staff recommends approval of the average lakeshore setback variance. <br />