Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 6953 ���p CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL y� G,� No. 6 9 5 3 ��kESH��� A RESOLUTION DENYING A VARIANCE FROM MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1379 FILE NO. LA18-000103 WHEREAS, on December 19, 2018, All Energy Solar ("Applicant"), on behalf of the properly owners William and Eleanor Ferril (Owners)applied for a variance from the City Code for the property addressed 240 Wakefield Road and legally described as: Lot 2,Block l,Wakefield Farms 2"d Addition(hereinafter the"Property"); made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78- 1379 to allow a solar array to be located on a rack, rather than an building; and WHEREAS, on January 22, 2019, after published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, on January 22, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the variance; and WHEREAS,on February 1 l, 2019,the City Council reviewed the application and the recommendations of the Planning Commission and City staff; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby denies the requested variance as described above based on the following findings of fact concerning the Property: FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #LA18-000103. The analysis contained within staff inemos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the above mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings are hereby incorporated by reference. 2. The Property is located in the RR-1B Zoning District. 3. The Property contains 3 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 268 feet. 1 ���p CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL y� �,� No. 6 9 5 3 I�kEsxo�`` G 4. The Property is exempt from the Stormwater Quality Overlay District regulations. 5. Applicant has applied for the following variance[s]: a. Variance to permit the placement of a solar array on a rack mounted to the ground, versus mounted to a building as required by Ordinance. 6. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variance 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: 1. "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. . . ."The use of the property as residential,with a permitted use solar array is reasonable so long as the solar array is located on a building and is not a stand alone structure. Solar arrays are permissible and in harmony with the comprehensive plan so long as they are located on top of a building allowed to exist in the appropriate zoning district to avoid the appearance of a solar farm or other use that is incompatible with the zoning district. 2. "Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan." The Comprehensive Plan supports the use of alternative energies. Though it is recognized that this support is not given at the expense of the existing natural environment, meaning trees should not need to be removed to support solar. 3. "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: a. The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, however, the proposed use is notpermitted by the official controls. Solar arrays are not permitted as a stand alone structure as proposed by the applicant. The applicant has failed to demonstrate why the solar array can not be located on top of a structure as contemplated by the City Code as opposed to a stand alone structure. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. 2 ���p CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL �� 1,� No. 6 9 5 3 G `�kESHO�� The land owner did not provide circumstances that were unique to the property to justify the variance. c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." The placement of the solar panels would be easily visible to properties to the south, including the public Luce Line Trail. While solar is allowed in the zoning district of the Subject Property, they are not allowed as a stand alone structure and the request to locate the panels would alter the essential character of the locality based on the size, height and visibility of surrounding properties. 4. "Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties." Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 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."An array, mounted on an accessory building could be built and still gain access to the sun. The applicant has not demonstrated that they are unable to access direct sunlight if the variance is granted. 6. "The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located." This condition is not applicable, as the use for a solar array is a permitted use in all zones. 7. "The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling."This condition is not applicable. 8. "T'he special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property." The conforming lot, with characteristic slope and tree cover is not peculiar to support the need for the variance. 9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located."The desire to place a solar array on the ground could be found in many zoning districts. 10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." The use of the property for a residence is 3 ���p CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL s� `� No. 6 9 5 3 G `�XESH04�' obtained. Options exists within the parameters of the code to install solar panels. The current request appears to be a mere convenience. 11. "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter." Given the lack of support via practical difficulty analysis,the City Council feels that granting the variance would be tantamount to approving an ordinance amendment, and in so doing, potentially harming the intent of the zoning ordinance. 12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant,but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulTy."Placement of the array on a rack versus a new or existing building is seen as a convenience. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS: Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby denies a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1379 to allow a ground mounted solar array, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council denial is based on the entire record, above Findings. 2. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution may result in the termination of any authority granted herein. ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this 25th day of February, 2019. ATTEST: CITY OF ORONO: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh,Mayor 4