11-09-2020 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LA20-000066 October 19, 2020 Page 2 of 4 Tier 1 42,613s.f. (1 acre) 10,653 s.f. (25 %) 5,637 s.f. 13.2 %) 5,922 s.f. (13.9 %) Applicable Regulations: Average Lakeshore Setback Variance (Section 78-1279) The existing home is currently placed forward of the ALS. The proposed addition is on the south side of the property. The proposed addition meets all other zoning requirements and does not encroach on any neighboring lakeview. 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 proposed location of the home addition does not block lake views of the adjacent property owners, and therefore is harmonious with the intent of the Ordinance. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The average lakeshore setback variance is consistent with the goals in the comprehensive plan to protect lake views. 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 variance requests are residential in nature and are reasonable considering the current location of the home. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; ; The location of the structures on the property and configuration of the lot were not created by the property owner and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. 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. Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 147 147