08-21-2017 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

r • FILE#17-3963 21 Aug 2017 Page 3 of 5 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 not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn.Stat. § 216C.06,subd. 2,when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.537 Subd. 6(2)variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance.The intent for the acreage minimums set forth in the ordinance for each district is to maintain and control density to the desired levels.This project creates a lot which is nonconforming with respect to area and is not in harmony with the ordinance. This criterion is not met. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.The CMP's primary goal has been, and continues to be,the preservation of the lake and natural environment. The Comprehensive Plan finds that high density in the Shoreland serves to harm the lake water quality. The minimum lot sizes are intended to address overcrowding of the lake,thus preservation of the lake quality,and the City's flexible side yard setback regulations are intended to preserve a property owners right to improve their own property. The addition of a second lot is inconsistent with the preservation goals of the CMP. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The official controls require a minimum acreage and width for each newly created building lot.This development does not meet the minimum standards for acreage.This criterion is not met. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The size of the existing property was not created by the landowner however it is not unique.There are many properties which exceed the minimum acreage requirement yet are not twice the minimum thus supporting a subdivision to create a new building lot as required by the Code.The purchase price of the property was created by landowner.This criterion is not met; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The character of the neighborhood is primarily made up of 1.0 acre and greater lots.There are three properties less than one acre but the majority are conforming with respect to area. The variance will alter the character of the neighborhood.This criterion is not met. Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have been identified as a primary factor in the variance request by the applicant. In the applicant's statement(their Practical Difficulties exhibit),they indicated that the property was purchased "at a premium at public auction"and identified this as"a factor" in their practical difficulty determination.The purchase price of the property is not a valid practical difficulty.This criterion is not met. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems.Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06,subd. 2,when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78. This condition is not applicable.