My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-28-2021 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2021
>
06-28-2021 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/9/2021 7:33:58 AM
Creation date
11/9/2021 7:26:32 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
182
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />CITY OF ORONO <br />RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> <br />NO. ________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />Plan. The variance to permit the minimal upward volume expansions is solely to upgrade <br />the functionality of the carriage house, as well as allow the boathouse to conform to the <br />floodplain regulations. The setbacks of the boathouse do not allow for the full 15 feet of <br />rescue bench fill around the building as required. This criterion is met. <br /> <br />3. “Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are <br />practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. ‘Practical difficulties,’ as used in <br />connection with the granting of a variance, means that: <br />a. The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, <br />however, the proposed use is not permitted by the official controls. <br /> <br />The request to permit minor upward expansions of the buildings within the <br />setbacks appear to be reasonable; the flat roof design of the boathouse minimizes <br />any potential negative impacts; the existing setbacks; the mature vegetation, and <br />location of neighboring homes separate the buildings from the adjacent neighbors. <br />This criterion is met. <br /> <br />b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created <br />by the landowner. <br /> <br />The Applicant proposes to reconstruct two nonconforming buildings to improve <br />functionality for the owners. The buildings were not constructed by the current <br />owners, or by current construction standards, and are in need of replacing due to <br />their age and deferred maintenance; and <br /> <br />c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.” <br /> <br />The requested variances will not result in the Property being out of character with <br />the neighborhood; will not expand the footprint of the buildings; or result in <br />additional encroachment into the setbacks toward the lake. The new <br />encroachments will not alter the character of the locality. This criterion is met. <br /> <br />4. “Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.” Economic <br />considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. <br /> <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 />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.