11-16-2020 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

Exhibit B PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM LA20-000070 1.The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Chapter. Response:The proposed alterations to the owner's residence would convert a portion of the structure that is currently deck space into living space.This change is modest and reasonable, but due to a unique siteline setback issue with the property to the north,the zoning rules forbid it. 2.The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. Response:This improvement will fit within the existing footprint of the house in terms of all boundary,shoreline,and site-line setbacks and in terms of the hardcover. However,the strange position of the property to the north which is located "260'from the lake shore but X33' from the man-made lagoon that connects to Lake Minnetonka has produced an exaggerated site-line setback that almost no other properties along the lake have to deal with. A literal interpretation of the site-line setback ordinance would have made this property completely unbuildable in the first place as evidenced by the original survey for the home when originally built. 3.The variance,if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality. Response:This improvement will have no detrimental effect on the essential character of the locality as you can see by the plans. It will be constructed to blend perfectly with the existing structure. 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter. Response: Economic considerations are not a factor here. 5. Practical difficulties 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 Minnesota Statutes,Section 1163.06,Subd. 2,when in harmony with this Chapter. Response: N/A 6.The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not allowed under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. Response: N/A 7.The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Response: N/A 8.The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. Response:The unusual site-line setback caused by the property to the north is the source of this difficulty. 9.The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. Response:The majority of other properties in the area enjoy much more reasonable setbacks and in some cases are flagrantly non- compliant. 10.The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Response:The property in question is a typical residential property and the improvements to this property are reasonable and perfectly within the rights of any property owner in this same community. 11.The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health,safety,comfort,morals,or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. Response:This variance request, if granted,will not adversely affect any of the neighbors.The only neighbor that may be slightly impacted by this change would be the neighbor to the north and they have provided their written permission and blessing to these plans. 12.The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Response:This variance request is necessary to allow the owner to use their property in the same reasonable manner that all other residential property owners in the area enjoy.