10-12-2020 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LA20-000056 September 21, 2020 Page 3 of 4 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 a single family home with an accessory building is an allowed use in the Lr-1C 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 is substandard in size and has an existing nonconforming accessory building, which also apply to many properties in the area. The setbacks are not out of character. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The existing accessory building is located within a setback which is nonconforming to the city code. This is similar to other structures in the district. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The applicant states the due to the location of the existing accessory building on the property, the goal for the remodel/ encroachment is to make it safer and more attractive. Staff finds there is other locations of the property that are conforming to the code and the applicant is able to rebuild the existing accessory structure in-kind in the same location. The owner currently has use of the property for the enjoyment of the principle home. The encroachment for an accessory building in the setback would act as a convenience. 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. The proposed roofline encroachment is not supported by practical difficulty and maybe contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The proposed roofline encroachment would serve as a convenience to the applicant as they have reasonable use of the property for a single family home. The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Engineer Comments. The structure is close to the property line. I would recommend installation of gutters and downspouts or other means to ensure roof runoff is not directed toward the neighboring property. Public Comments