Laserfiche WebLink
PHONiNO. <br />^DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES <br />METRO WATERS. 1200 WARNER ROAD. ST. PAUL. MN 55106 p,leno <br />772-7910 <br />August 21,1999 \V' <br />Ms. Jeanne A Mabusth <br />Building and Zoning Administrator <br />City of Orono <br />2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 <br />Crystal Bay, MN 55323 <br />RE: Greg L. Frazee Variance Application, Lake Minnetonka (27-133), City of Orono, <br />Hennepin County <br />Dear Ms. Mabusth; <br />We have reviewed the above-referenced lakeshore setback variance and hardcover <br />variance proposal (received August 8, 1995) 1745 Concordia Street (City #2057) and we <br />recommend denial of the proposal for the following reasons; <br />1 .The proposed house is within the 75’ setback from the Ordinary High Water level <br />(OHW) of Lake Minnetonka and does not conform with the shoreland standards <br />adopted by the City of Orono. <br />2.There are reasonable alternatives available to placing the proposed house within <br />the setback of Lake Minnetonka. An examination of the plat indicates that sites <br />exist for structures which are outside on the 75 setback to Lake Minnetonka. <br />3.The proposed amount of impervious surface exceeds the percentage of impervious <br />surface that is allowed by the shoreland standards adopted by the City of Orono. <br />The City of Orono should work with the applicant to reduce the amount of <br />impervious surface for this proposal. <br />4.Hardship must be demonstrated to justify receiving a variance. The approval of a <br />variance due to hardship should be based on the following prereguisites. <br />A. <br />B. <br />The proposed use is reasonable. <br />It would be unreasonable to require conformance with the ordinance. <br />Practical difficulties may arise due to 'functional and aesthetic concerns" and <br />economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulty. <br />AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER