Laserfiche WebLink
FILE #LA23-000008 <br />April 17, 2023 <br />Page 4 of 7 <br /> <br /> <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 /> <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 /> <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 /> <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 /> <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