08-11-2003 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

NOW» THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono. Minnesota licrcby denies the requested variances as described above based on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning this property: 1. The property consists of .20 acres, or 8,550 s.f. in land area. 2. Renewal variances were granted in 2001 (Resolution Number 4645) o • this property to permit construction of the existing home. This resolution placed hardcover limits on the property which stated “.Any hardcover in addition to that noted will require variance approval by the City and is not likely to be approved in the future unless concurrent removals of pre existing hardcover result in no hardcover increase above the 40% allowance." 3. The house was built in 2001 with a sliding glass door off the lake side of the home. 1 he Building Code does allow for a sliding glass door in place of a window but it must be obstructed with either a railing or board. The sliding glass door does not constitute the applicants' right to construct a lakeside deck. 4. It is the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code to protect the water quality of Lake Minnetonka by limiting the amount of hardcover and structural coverage a lot contains. No hardship exists on this lot that would constitute variance approval for additional hardco\ er or structural co\erage. 5. The granting of the requested variances would be contrary to the provisions of Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.08. Subdivision 3 (A) with which the applicant must first comply in order that variance be granted. The Council finds that: a. The pro,..iiy in question can be put to a reasonable use if used under the conditions allowed by the official controls if the proposed variances were denied. b. The plight of the landowner is not due to circumstances unique to his property but rather circumstances created by the landowner. Page 2 of 4