My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-16-2016 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2016
>
02-16-2016 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/18/2019 2:23:27 PM
Creation date
8/25/2016 9:13:01 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
356
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
FILE#16-3806 <br /> 10 Feb 2016 <br /> Page 3 of 5 <br /> 4. All other zoning district standards can be met. <br /> The property is nearly conforming with respect to lot area and lot width, however the applicant's <br /> request for an average lakeshore setback variance results in the property's inability to conform to <br /> #1 above.Therefore, lot area and width variances are required in order to redevelop the property. <br /> Avera�e Lakeshore Setback Variance (Section 78-1279) <br /> The applicant is proposing to construct a new home with lakeside deck at a similar setback to <br /> the existing structures on the property. The existing deck and home encroachments are as <br /> much as 55 feet lakeward of the average lakeshore setback line. The new home is proposed to <br /> encroach approximately 48 feet lakeward of the average lakeshore setback line and the new <br /> deck is shown with as much as a 50 foot encroachment lakeward of the line. <br /> Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123) <br /> In reviewing applications for variance, the P/anning 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, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect <br /> on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider <br /> recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances <br /> where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique <br /> to the individual property 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 council 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 lot <br /> area, lot width variances requested are consistent with the general intent of the <br /> Ordinance. The requested average lakeshore setback variance is in harmony with the <br /> Ordinance as the most adjacent neighbors' lake views will not be impacted by the new <br /> home. <br /> 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variances resulting in a <br /> permit for construction of a single family residence in a residential zone are consistent <br /> with the Comprehensive Plan. <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 request to permit construction of portions <br /> of the proposed home lakeward of the average lakeshore setback appears to be <br /> reasonable as the owners of the adjacent properties have stated that they are <br /> not adversely impacted; the mature vegetation and topography separate the <br /> subject property from the adjacent neighbors. <br /> b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; <br /> The sub-standard size of the subject property was not the result of actions by <br /> the landowner.The neighboring home to the north is set back further from the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.