#6570-variances-2015 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

�o�o C ITY C�F ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL �`�l� �,�'~� N O. � � � O kEsxo�` A10. Given the constraints of the buildable area between the 75' setback line and the 30' front setback line, replacing the existing house in virtually the same location would appear to be most appropriate. A11. In considering this application for variances, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variances 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. ANALYSIS: B1. "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance . . . ." The proposed variances to allow the reconstruction of and additions to the existing house on property zoned for single family use is consistent with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. B2. "Variances shall only be permitted... when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan." Granting of the proposed variances to reconstruct and make additions to the existing single fainily residence is consistent with the residential guiding of tlus property in the Comprehensive Plan. B3. "Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. `Practical difficulties,' as used in connection with the granting of a variance,means that: i. The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, however,the proposed use is not permitted by the official controls" ii. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." iii. The variance, if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality." The Applicant is proposing to use the Property in a reasonable manner very similaz to how it is currently and has historically been used. The plight of the Applicant is due to having a sma11 lot in a developed neighborhood of similarly sma11 lots, and which is physically constrained as to expansion due to required setbacks, conditions not created by the Applicant. The Applicant has demonstrated that the lot size and shape; the location of the existing house in relation to the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka, the street lot line and the side Page 4 of 8