Laserfiche WebLink
• #16-3798 <br /> 14 Jan 16 <br /> Page 3 of 4 <br /> Governing Regulation:Variance (Section 78-123) <br /> In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the <br /> proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and <br /> anticipated traffic conditions, lighr and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect <br /> on values of property in the surrounding area. The P/anning Commission shall consider <br /> recommending approva/ for variances from the litera/provisions of the Zoning Code in instances <br /> where their strict enforcement wou/d cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique <br /> to the individual properry under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is <br /> demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning <br /> Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties <br /> also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. <br /> Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, <br /> subd. 2, when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a <br /> variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the <br /> affected person's land is located.The board or councif may permit as a variance the temporary <br /> use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. <br /> According to MN §462.537 Subd. 6(2)variances shall only be permitted when: <br /> 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The <br /> proposed variance will be in harmony with the intent of the Zoning Code as the <br /> proposed structure will be screened from view by the vegetation and natural berm that <br /> exists between the garage and North Shore Drive. <br /> 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. This statement is true; the <br /> variance would allow for the preservation of trees on the property. <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 <br /> permitted by the official controls;The re-construction of the detached garage in <br /> the proposed location is reasonable on this wooded, 1.0 acre residential <br /> property. <br /> b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; <br /> The shape of this lot,the existing tree stands combined with the location of the <br /> existing (& proposed) home on the property result in a unique circumstance <br /> allowing for a 422 square foot garage to be almost completely screened from <br /> views off the property; and <br /> c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The garage will <br /> be screened adequately year-round, will be aesthetically interesting and <br /> keeping with the style of the proposed home, and will screened from views <br /> from off of the property. This condition is met. <br /> Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be <br /> granted as follows: <br /> 4. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such <br /> property or immediately adjoining property. The property is conforming to the LR-16 <br /> standards and contains a large number of mature trees for screening.The topography <br /> of the property drops off to the north east and the owner feels the location of the <br /> existing garage is the most logical placement for a replacement garage. <br /> 5. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which <br /> the land is located. The property is unique in that, with the exception of the small lot <br />