10-12-2020 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LA20-000057 September 21, 2020 Page 3 of 5 permitted in the shoreland or tributary setback zone if the property has no other frontage on or access to a public or private road. The applicant is proposing an 18’ wide driveway within the 75’ lakeyard where only an 8’ wide driveway is permitted. Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. 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 this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.357 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The requested rear yard setback, average lakeshore setbacks, driveway standard and hardcover within the 75’ of the lakeyard are not in harmony with the Ordinances as the proposed addition would limit the lake sightline for neighbors and create addition massing close to the right of way. The number of variances requests suggest that the site does not support the proposal. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variances resulting in a permit for an addition to an existing single family home in a residential zone 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 build a home addition within the street yard setback, average lakeshore setback, new hardcover in the 75’ lakeyard and not meeting driveway standards does not appear to be reasonable as the current home has adequate use of the lot. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The owner’s desire to enclose the existing garage to make more living space and then add a new garage within the street yard and average lakeshore setback to the home is a condition created by the landowner and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The setback variances from the street yard and average lakeshore setback resulting from a building addition may adversely alter the character of the area. The variances for the driveway dimensions and new driveway hardcover in the 75’ lake yard may limit the parking ability for the homeowner and may adversely impact the character of the neighborhood.