Laserfiche WebLink
�0AT CITY OF ORONO <br /> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> �� NO.7260 <br /> G <br /> t-IkQSHO <br /> 3. The Property contains 0.97 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 112 feet. <br /> 4. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 24.2 % according to the <br /> Stormwater Quality Overlay District. <br /> 5. Applicant has applied for the following variance[s]: <br /> a. Average Lakeshore Setback <br /> 6. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and <br /> recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variance <br /> upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic <br /> conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values <br /> of property in the surrounding area. <br /> ANALYSIS: <br /> 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The <br /> intent of the average lake shore setback is to preserve neighboring properties' <br /> views of the lake. The proposed encroachment will not impact these views. <br /> 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed use of the lot for <br /> residential purposes is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as is the <br /> preservation of lake views and Shoreland management. <br /> 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. <br /> a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not <br /> permitted by the official controls; The placement of the addition is a reasonable <br /> location given the intent of the ordinance to preserve views, and manage <br /> sensitive environmental concerns. <br /> b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The <br /> existing conditions of the existing home on the lot and the extreme average <br /> lakeshore setback due to the neighbor to the north are circumstances not <br /> created by the landowner and <br /> c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The <br /> encroachment into the ALS will not impact the character of the locality <br /> 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic <br /> considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. <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. 17, when in harmony with Orono City Code <br /> Chapter 78. This condition is not applicable. <br /> 2 <br />