Laserfiche WebLink
FILE # LA22-000041 <br />15 Aug 2022 <br />Page 3 of 5 <br /> <br />two neighboring homes and would impact their view of the lake. <br /> <br />Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123) <br />In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the <br />proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated <br />traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of <br />property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for <br />variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement <br />would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under <br />consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be <br />in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not <br />constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate <br />access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered <br />construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, 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 <br />for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or council may permit <br />as a variance the 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 lot <br />does include difficulties in the orientation of the shoreline and location of adjacent <br />lots/homes. However, there is a considerable building envelope on the property which will <br />allow for lake views. The proposed variance is not in harmony with the purpose of the <br />Ordinance. <br />2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. There is a conforming building <br />envelope allowing for lake views; the proposed variance is inconsistent with the <br />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 <br />permitted by the official controls; The request to permit construction of the home <br />in the proposed location partially within the average lakeshore setback does not <br />appear to be reasonable considering the ample building envelope and size of the <br />property. This criterion is not met. <br />b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The <br />location of the neighboring homes and properties are out of the landowners’ <br />control. However, the project is for redevelopment and the home can be located to <br />comply; and <br />c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance is <br />requested in order to permit construction of a home designed to fit the character <br />of the neighborhood according to the submitted information. <br />Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be <br />granted as follows: <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. 2, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78. <br />This condition is not applicable.