05-16-2022 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

FILE#LA22-000017 16 May 2022 Page 3 of 4 • 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. 14,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 intent of the ordinance is to establish minimum lot sizes and protect against overcrowding at the lakeshore. The proposed variances does not negatively impact those goals. The applicants' proposal would serve to improve some existing nonconformities in the substandard lot widths, hardcover and building setback orientation. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The use of the property for single family residential is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 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 request to realign the shared property line between two nonconforming lots improves nonconforming lot width, hardcover and building setback as applied to for the adjacent properties. The use of the property is established with the existing • homes on the properties. The variance does not impact this use. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner;The unique shape,size, and orientation of the subject properties present challenges.The properties have been developed over time not exclusively by the property owners. The proposed boundary line adjustment follows the historic development pattern.The suggested reallocation of 1 property would result in more improved nonconforming city codes on the property bringing the property closer to conformance for the neighborhood.There should be consideration for variance approvals from the lot width as the applicants are proposing improvements on both lots. c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The lots are both nonconforming as they pertain to lot width. Altering the lot line between the parcels improves the lot width as one point of measurement but increase the nonconformity at another point of measurement creating an even trade between the two nonconforming parcels,so there is little impact to the character of the area. 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. 17,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 single family home is allowed in the LR-1C District for properties which meet the minimum requirements. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two- illfamily dwelling.This condition is not applicable.