Laserfiche WebLink
• <br /> • <br /> DocuSign Envelope ID:55356F20-A548-4218-8D6A-46287D3DBC7B <br /> ,. : 1, ALL <br /> ENERGY <br /> 1642 Carroll Ave <br /> St.Paul,MN 55104 <br /> www.allenergysolar.corn <br /> City of Orono Planning Commission <br /> City of Orono <br /> 2750 Kelley Parkway <br /> Orono, MN 55356 <br /> 05/16/2017 <br /> We, Larry and Anne Baran, hereby apply for a variance, with the help of All Energy Solar, to Orono <br /> City ordinance Title VI, Ch. 78, Article X., Division 1., Sec. 78-1379 subsection E. b. "Roof-mounted <br /> systems allowed. The only solar energy systems allowed in the city are those that are roof-mounted." <br /> based on the following examples of practical difficulty created by this ordinance: <br /> 1. Vegetation and Topography: Alternate locations for a ground-mounted solar electric array on the <br /> property would not provide adequate access to sunlight due to the existing vegetation and the <br /> respective shadow casting. Also, the topography of the property limit alternative locations due to <br /> the natural sloping of the terrain. <br /> 2. Minnesota Made Solar incentive: We won a lottery through the Minnesota Department of <br /> Commerce: Made in Minnesota Solar Rebate program. This lottery rebate is difficult to receive and <br /> makes the investment into our solar energy system very attractive. This incentive is based on the <br /> production of the solar array and a more efficient system will result in a better financial investment. <br /> If solar panels were to be placed on the roof of the home, the incentive levels would be less than <br /> favorable. <br /> 3. System Size: The available roof space would result in a smaller system size which in turn means <br /> less solar production and a greater dependence on nonrenewable energy sources. Furthermore, the <br /> roof is not at an ideal tilt angle and orientation, which again, would result in lower energy <br /> production. Direct sun access on the roof would also be inadequate when compared to the ground <br /> mount location. <br /> 4. Minnesota Statute 462.357 Subdivision 6 Paragraph 2 states that "Practical difficulties include, but <br /> are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems."A roof mounted <br /> system at this location would not provide adequate access to sunlight, when compared to the <br /> sunlight access achieved via a ground mounted system at the proposed location. <br /> a. A detailed analysis was conducted and the location with the most adequate amount of <br /> sunlight selected. Please refer to Exhibit A for further details. <br /> For these reasons we ask the Planning Commission to approve our application for a variance and allow us <br /> to install a ground mounted solar PV system on our property as originally proposed. <br /> Respectfully, <br /> Larry and Anne Baran <br /> —DocuSigned by: <br /> (Ary tuA,I atm bar5/16/2017 RECEIVED <br /> L-00CD3F4200s3437 <br /> MAY 172011 <br /> # 3943 CITY OF ORONO <br />