04-13-2020 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________________ 3 The visual impacts resulting from the additions proposed within the average lakeshore setback will not alter the character of the neighborhood. Rather, the home will not impact views from the lake nor will it appear to be more visually obtrusive than the existing buildings on the property. 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 residential home is an allowed use in the LR-1A 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’s location and orientation as a peninsula, functionally an island, is unique. Due to the nature of the Property on the point, the application of the average lakeshore setback requirement causes a practical difficulty. 9. “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located.” The Property’s location on the lake is unique and applies primarily to this Property; the application of the setback requirement combined with the challenges of the flood hazard area restrict the ability to improve the Property without a variance, creating a practical difficulty. 10. “The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.” The home can be reconstructed in kind. However, the minimal relief from the ordinance allows for functional improvements to the footprint, retaining the character of the lot and are consistent with the existing home. Relating to the average lakeshore setback, this condition is met. 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 project will not impair the health, safety, comfort, or morals of the public.