My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-18-2024 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2024
>
03-18-2024 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2024 3:17:18 PM
Creation date
3/19/2024 3:01:25 PM
Metadata
Text box
ID:
1
Creator:
Katie Fitzsimmons
Created:
3/19/2024 3:04 PM
Modified:
3/19/2024 3:04 PM
Text:
PC Exhibit C
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
148
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
3/15/24, 11:26 AM Permit Details | Citizenserve <br />https://www2.citizenserve.com/Admin/PermitController?Action=DisplayPermitDetail&SelectedTab=Permits&Permit_ID=14195024&WorkOrder_ID=881…1/2 <br />PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM <br />LA24-000009 <br />1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted <br />by the Zoning Chapter. <br />Response: Yes, The intent usage of the property is a reasonable request and meets all other zoning <br />requirements. <br />2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created <br />by the landowner. <br />Response: The uniqueness of the property was set in the early 1990s with the development to be <br />plotted for single family residence with large acreage lots. It is unique that the house directly behind <br />them is a side neighbor because of a small piece of land they plotted to provide access to the lake <br />3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. <br />Response: No, The house has been design to blend and be a natural surrounding structure to the <br />land. <br />4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use <br />for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter. <br />Response: No, there is no economic considerations. This is a vacant lot that hasn't been developed <br />since the original plot. <br />5. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight <br />for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as <br />defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this <br />Chapter. <br />Response: Not appicable for this application. <br />6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any <br />use that is not allowed under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected <br />person's land is located. <br />Response: The intent of the develop plot was for single dwelling use. This is consistent with our <br />request. <br />7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family <br />dwelling as a two-family dwelling. <br />Response: Not applicable for this applicaiton <br />8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such <br />property or immediately adjoining property. <br />Response: Yes, The adjoining property abudt both the North lot line and East Lot line. Because of <br />the average lake shore setback requirement the entire property doesn't conform with the zoning <br />30
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.