06-17-2024 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

FILE # LA23-000062 17 June 2024 Page 4 of 7 6) Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is planned to be used in the future; the installation of the stone staircase and stone retaining walls will change the existing character of the property. The stone staircase and wall construction, which is a continuation of the rip-rap, will not provide an opportunity for vegetative screening from the lake. This criterion is not met. 7) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; the installation of stone retaining walls without vegetative screening, will change the character of the surrounding area. This criterion is not met. 8) Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; the proposed retaining walls will not be screened from view from the lake. The current natural appearance of the property, although unmaintained for years, will likely be altered by the proposed stone stair and retaining wall improvements. This criterion is not met. 9) Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area or have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses; the lakeshore bluff improvements should not impact the neighboring property values or the enjoyment of the neighboring property owners. 10) Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and activities likely to disturb surrounding uses; the applicant has not provided a landscape plan to provide adequate natural screening and buffering of the stone stairs and retaining wall improvements when viewed from the lake. This criterion is not met. 11) Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise, glare, vibration, odors, fumes, dust, electrical interference, general unsightliness, or other means; the proposed walls should not create a nuisance situation. 12) Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties, traffic congestion, or unsafe access; the property is situated on a severe curve along a busy County roadway. The amount of traffic, proximity, and location of the driveway, and the topography pose challenges for access and construction. According to their narrative, the applicant is proposing to deliver the materials to the site from North Shore Drive. The applicant should inform Hennepin County of the project scope and timeline and obtain necessary permits. 13) Designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area and to minimize environmental impact; the applicant has opted to install walls using boulder materials as a continuation of the rip-rap to be installed. They have not proposed landscaping to screen the walls to be compatible with the character of the improvements within the surrounding area. This criterion is not met. 14) All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; the lake yard improvements should not result in any lighting or glare being cast off the property toward the public street, the neighbors, or the lake; and 15) Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. This is true of the project. A CUP may be granted subject to such conditions as the Council may prescribe. Additionally, a CUP shall remain in effect as long as the conditions imposed by the City Council are observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the city from enacting or amending official controls to change the status of conditional uses. Variance Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do 11