Laserfiche WebLink
cLON CITY <br />NO <br />OF. <br />ORONO7280RESOLUTIONOFTHECITY COUNCIL <br />4kES H 00' <br />There are existing retaining walls in the lake yard. The variance to permit the <br />expanded retaining wall structure within the 75-foot lake setback will help to <br />maintain the existing slope and character of the area. <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 <br />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 <br />Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is <br />located." This condition is not applicable, as residential improvements are permitted to <br />support a residential use in the LR-1 B District. <br />7. "The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling <br />as a two-family dwelling."This condition is not applicable. <br />8. "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such <br />property or immediately adjoining property." The slope of the Property combined with the <br />pre-existing improvements are unique conditions affecting the Property. <br />9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the <br />land is located."The Property's slope instability combined with the existing improvements <br />create conditions which do not apply to adjacent properties. <br />10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a <br />substantial property right of the applicant." Granting a lake setback variance to allow the <br />retaining walls within the 75-foot lake setback to be reconstructed with an expanded <br />footprint is reasonable, is a better solution long-term, and is necessary to preserve the <br />rights of the owner. The variance is supported by the vulnerable slope on the Property. <br />11. "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or <br />morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter." Granting the lake <br />yard setback variance allowing the retaining walls within the 75-foot lake setback will not <br />adversely impact health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any way be contrary to the <br />ordinances. <br />3