My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-27-2003 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2003
>
10-27-2003 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2023 8:45:21 AM
Creation date
2/8/2023 3:05:23 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
447
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
FILEM3-29S2 <br />October 10.2003 <br />Page4ofS <br />Hardship Statement <br />Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit A, and should be asked for <br />additional testimony regarding the application. <br />Hardship Analysis <br />In consUering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the <br />proposed variance upon the health, safety and weffare of the community, existing and anticipaud <br />tt^fic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, rbk to the public safety, and the effect on values of <br />property In the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval <br />for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code In instances where their strict <br />enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual <br />property^ under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when It Is demonstrated that such <br />actions will be In keeping with the spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. <br />Staff would make the following recommendations in regards to the criteria for “undue <br />hardship” pertinent to this application: <br />1. “The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under <br />conditions allowed by the official controls.” <br />Over % of the property is located ahead of the average lakeshore setback. In the <br />opinion ofstaff this criterion is met. <br />2. “The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not <br />created by the landowner.” <br />In the opinion of staff this criterion is met. <br />3. “The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.” <br />The proposed changes will lessen the bulk and mass of the home, thus will improve <br />the character of the locality. In the opinion ofstaff this criterion is met. <br />4. “Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if <br />reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter.' <br />The applicant has not indicated economic consideration for this project. In the <br />opinion ofstaff this criterion is met. <br />5. “Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct <br />sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered <br />construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in <br />harmony with this Chapter.” <br />Not applicable. <br />6. “The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a <br />variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone <br />where the affected person's land is located.* <br />Not applicable. <br />1. “The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a <br />1 <br />i
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.