My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-27-2022 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2022
>
06-27-2022 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/7/2022 11:37:04 AM
Creation date
9/7/2022 11:26:58 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
122
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
FILE # LA22-000017 <br />16 May 2022 <br />Page 3 of 4 <br /> <br />circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it <br />is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. <br />Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are <br />not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth- <br />sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. §216C.06, subd. 14, when in harmony with this chapter. The <br />board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property <br />in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or council may permit as a variance the <br />temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. <br /> <br />According to MN §462.357 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when: <br />1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The intent of the <br />ordinance is to establish minimum lot sizes and protect against overcrowding at the lakeshore. The <br />proposed variances does not negatively impact those goals. The applicants’ proposal would serve to <br />improve some existing nonconformities in the substandard lot widths, hardcover and building setback <br />orientation. <br />2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The use of the property for single family <br />residential is consistent with the comprehensive plan. <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 permitted by the <br />official controls; <br />The request to realign the shared property line between two nonconforming lots <br />improves nonconforming lot width, hardcover and building setback as applied to for <br />the adjacent properties. The use of the property is established with the existing <br />homes on the properties. The variance does not impact this use. <br />b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The unique <br />shape, size, and orientation of the subject properties present challenges. The properties have <br />been developed over time not exclusively by the property owners. The proposed boundary <br />line adjustment follows the historic development pattern. The suggested reallocation of <br />property would result in more improved nonconforming city codes on the property bringing <br />the property closer to conformance for the neighborhood. There should be consideration for <br />variance approvals from the lot width as the applicants are proposing improvements on both <br />lots. <br />c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The lots are both <br />nonconforming as they pertain to lot width. Altering the lot line between the parcels <br />improves the lot width as one point of measurement but increase the nonconformity at <br />another point of measurement creating an even trade between the two nonconforming <br />parcels, so there is little impact to the character of the area. <br />4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have <br />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 for solar <br />energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § <br />216C.06, subd. 17, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78. This condition is not applicable. <br />6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City <br />Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is <br />not applicable, as a single family home is allowed in the LR-1C District for properties which meet the <br />minimum requirements. <br />7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two- <br />family dwelling. This condition is not applicable.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.