Laserfiche WebLink
PHOH€ NO <br />|f^ STATE OF <br />^DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES <br />METRO WATERS. 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL. MN 55106c,no <br />772-7910 <br />August 21, 1995 <br />Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth <br />Builcfing 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 sf Teland standards <br />adopted by the City of Orono. <br />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 />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 />Hardship must be demonstrated to justify receiving a variance. The approval of a <br />variance due to hardship should be based on the following prerequisites: <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