My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-17-2003 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
11-17-2003 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2023 1:41:41 PM
Creation date
2/9/2023 1:39:39 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.
/
396
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).
View images
View plain text
M0J.2H0 <br />No%tinber P. 20tJ <br />p«gc4Qrs <br />of house placement and sight lines up and dov^n the road\%ay. Because the proposal vvill <br />not be enclosed the uniformity- issues will not be affected. <br />Lastly, the 60* right-of-way of the road is excessive compared to the 50’ right-of-right for <br />m<Mt local streets throughout the City. The boulevard in the front yard of the property is <br />20 ’ where usually 10* to 15* would exist on a typical local street. Because of this the <br />house and proposed co\ercd entry wouldn’t appear abnormally closer to the lot line than <br />that of any other home in the neighborhood. <br />Alro. staff has found covered entries to be common throughout the City and surrounding <br />cities for that matter. They pros ide safer entry to the house in the winter months and <br />^ng r^'n. Many cities allow a cov ered entry as an allowed encroachment and staff will <br />be c.xamining this issue for discussion at a future work session. <br />Staff would make the following recommendations in regards lo 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 ofltcial controls.* <br />.-I covered entry would not be allow ed without \ ariance approval <br />2. ‘Ihc plight of the la.-Jowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not <br />created by the landowner.* <br />The excessive right-o f-w ay w idih is unique to this propern Also, placement of <br />the home ahead of the front yard setback is unique to the neighborhood but not <br />out of character due to the excesshe right-of-way width. <br />3. -The varixnce. if grar.ted. will not alter the essential character of the locality * <br />Should the variance be granted the essential character of the neighborhood will <br />notbeaffected This is due to the excessive right-of-way and that the proposal is <br />for a covered entry rather than a totally enclosed addition <br />4. *Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if <br />of ihe Zoning Chapter." <br />5. -Undue hardship also includes, bu: is not limited to. inadequate access to direct <br />sunlight for solar energy sy stems. N'ariances shall be granted for earth sheltered <br />construction as defined in Minnesoui Statutes. Section 116J 06. Subd. 2 when in <br />h3rt»ony with this Chapter.* <br />.Vor applicable <br />k 3oard of Appeals and .Adjustments or the Council mav not permit as a <br />Sot applicable
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.