My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-17-2003 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
•03-2917 <br />AMfMl It.lMl <br />piftstr? <br />or a 0-7S* zone hardcover variance. The applicant has submitted plans that show a <br />rebuild and consistently staff and Planning Commission have required full removals in <br />the 0-75 ’ zone. The area of structure in the 0-75 ’ zone amounts to 325 s.f. in relation to <br />the 2,734.425 s.f. house that is being proposed. Removal of structure in the 0-75 ’ zone <br />wx)uld only amount to 1 l.B% of the entire proposed home. The applicant has additional <br />area outside the 75* setback zone to compensate for this lost structure. Therefore, staff <br />doesn't find any hardships which would constitute approval of the creek setback or <br />hardcover variance in the 0-75 ’ zone. <br />Staff finds that due to the limited buildable area outside the 75* creek setback, a hardship <br />e.xists which is inherent to the property. The property consists of 12,000 s.f. in the 0-75 ’ <br />zone and only 6,580 s.f. in the 75-250* zone (refer to Exhibits G and H). <br />Staff w*ould make the following recommendations in regards to the criteria for "undue <br />hardship ’’ pertinent to this application: <br />1."The property in question caiuiot be put to a reasonable use if used under <br />conditions allowed by the official controls." <br />If the property owner wanted to rebuild, any reasonable sized home would <br />require severed variance approvals due to the limited buildable area. <br />"The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not <br />creat^ by the landowner." <br />The creek adjacent to the applicant's property b a circumstance that b unique to <br />the property and not a condition created by the landowner. <br />"The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." <br />Alar^ of the homes on Crestview Ax'enue are smaller homes on smaller lots. <br />Variances allowing less restrictive setbacks will not alter the character of the <br />locality. <br />"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 />Not applicable <br />"Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct <br />sunlight for solv 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 />1 <br />M
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.