Laserfiche WebLink
FILE #LA24-000023 <br />May 20, 2024 <br />Page 3 of 4 <br /> <br /> <br />adequate practical difficulty is not in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the <br />Ordinance. This criterion is not met. <br /> <br />2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variances resulting in a new <br />detached garage building within the required building setbacks is not consistent with the <br />Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has not identified the necessary practical difficulties <br />inherent to the land supporting their requests. This criterion is not 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 property current is being used for its intended use of a <br />single-family dwelling. The construction of a new detached garage building within the <br />required setbacks is not a reasonable use of the property when there are compliant <br />locations where the garage could be built. This criterion is not met. <br /> <br />b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The <br />subject property is a substandard size for the zoning district at 0.7 acres when 2.0 acres <br />is required. However, the size of the lot can accommodate a detached garage building <br />and meet the required setbacks. The applicant has identified the preservation of <br />existing trees as the reasoning for the placement of the garage. The trees on the <br />property are not protected by city regulations and can be removed; and <br /> <br />c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The proposed variances <br />resulting in the construction of a new accessory building closer to the side and year <br />property lines is not out of character for the surrounding neighborhood. There are <br />several accessory buildings in the area that do not meet the required setbacks. Also, <br />there are currently two sheds that are to be removed in the area that the proposed <br />garage will be placed. This criterion is met. <br /> <br />Additionally, City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as <br />follows: <br />4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations <br />have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. <br /> <br />5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for <br />solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in <br />Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 17, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78. This <br />condition is not applicable. <br /> <br />6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono <br />City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This <br />condition is not applicable, as a residential home is a permitted use in the LR-1A District. <br /> <br />7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a <br />two-family dwelling. This condition is not applicable. <br /> <br />8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property <br />or immediately adjoining property. The lot is substandard in size, but can accommodate an <br />accessory building within the required setbacks. The existing conditions of the site that include <br />94