Laserfiche WebLink
FILE#LA23-000008 <br /> April 17,2023 <br /> Page 4 of 7 <br /> by adding a porch.This porch will be in the same plane as the existing home, but due to the angle of the <br /> home on the property,the rear yard setback decreases to 21.4 feet.The applicant is proposing a 21.4-foot <br /> rear yard setback,where a 30-foot setback is required per code. <br /> Governing Regulation:Variance(Section 78-123) <br /> In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed <br /> variance upon the health,safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, <br /> light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding <br /> area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal <br /> provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties <br /> because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend <br /> approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the <br /> Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical <br /> difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy <br /> systems.Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. §216C.06, <br /> subd. 14,when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any <br /> use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is <br /> located.The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a <br /> two-family dwelling. <br /> According to MN §462.357 Subd. 6(2)variances shall only be permitted when: <br /> 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance.The variances <br /> for the construction of a new single-family home on an existing, nonconforming foundation and <br /> substandard parcel are supported by practical difficulties. Much of the existing home is located <br /> within the 75-foot lakeshore setback,in front of the average lakeshore setback line and closer to <br /> the rear property line than the required rear yard setback.The proposal is to build a new home <br /> on top of the existing foundation and keep the existing lakeside decks.The lot currently <br /> contains a detached garage within the 75-foot lakeshore setback.The applicant is requesting to <br /> demolish this structure and construct an attached garage in a similar location.This slightly <br /> increases the hardcover within the 75-foot lakeshore setback by 155 square feet.The expanded <br /> massing in front of the ALS is largely due to a steeper roof pitch to allow for a better insulated <br /> roof that will be able to shed snow effectively.The existing home does not meet the required <br /> rear yard setback of 30 feet.The proposal is to rebuild a new home on the existing foundation <br /> and to expand the footprint for a front porch.The front porch expansion is in the same plane as <br /> the existing wall, however due to the angle of the lot a reduced rear yard setback is requested. <br /> The construction of a new home on top of an existing, nonconforming foundation is in harmony <br /> with the general intent of the Ordinance due to the practical difficulties of the substandard lot <br /> size,extreme setback requirements,and location of the existing structures.This criterion is met. <br /> 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.The variances resulting in a new single- <br /> family home constructed on a nonconforming foundation is consistent with the Comprehensive <br /> Plan.The applicant has identified necessary practical difficulties inherent to the land supporting <br /> their requests.The overall reduction in total hardcover bringing the lot into conformance is also <br /> consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan.This criterion is met. <br /> 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. <br /> a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted <br /> by the official controls;The construction of a new single-family is a reasonable use of the <br /> property.The additional hardcover and massing requested is supported by practical <br />