07-27-2020 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________________ 3 1. “Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance . . . .” The intent of the LR-1B zoning district, which prescribes lot area and width requirements, is to protect the quality of stormwater runoff in Lake Minnetonka from the effects of dense development. If the variances are approved, the resulting boundary line shift increases the non-conformity on the Property. Regarding the side yard setback, the reduction of the non-conforming setback to 2 feet does not support the intent of the ordinance, to separate buildings from property lines toward meeting open space, water distribution, and maintenance goals. The applicant has not provided support to justify the variance. 2. “Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan.” The Comprehensive Plan guides the property for single family residential, at a density of 0.5-2 units per acre. The variances will not add additional units. This criteria is met. 3. “Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. ‘Practical difficulties,’ as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that: a. The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, however, the proposed use is not permitted by the official controls. The applicant stated N/A. The applicant has not provided support to justify the variance. The intent of the hardcover, lot area, and lot width standards is to maintain minimum densities and hard cover standards on each lot. Further, the side yard setback minimum (for the boat house) is to promote separation between structures. The request increases the nonconforming nature of the Property and the boathouse. This criteria is not met. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The applicant states “Yes, the simple line readjustment to reflect the natural contour of the properties”, though what is triggering the variance is the relocation of the lot line, initiated by the applicant. A variance, if granted, should be justified by the unique circumstances on the property. The applicant has not demonstrated that the natural contours of the Property are unique. The applicant has cited concerns of managing drainage and the ability to mow the property. There is no demonstrated problem with the current drainage and there are alternatives to landscaping or plantings that could be utilized to avoid mowing. This criterial is not met. c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.”