PC Packet 10-18-2011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Building Official Comments The Building Official has expressed some concerns about this roof-top intended unit being mounted on the ground and desires to have a 3rd party review the electrical code requirements. This comes from the Building Official's unfamiliarity with solar installations. The Building Official has indicated that the Electrical Code addresses the back feeding issue Public Safety has expressed concerns about. The Building Official has also indicated that a Commissioning Report would be required and that report should be issued to the Building Official in conjunction with the Electrical Permit request. This should suffice as a 3rd party review. Code Enforcement During an inspection of the site, staff discovered an unusual amount of outdoor storage along the rear of the building. Outdoor storage is prohibited in the Business Districts. The applicant has been advised of this violation. Regardless of the zoning requests outlined in this report, the applicant will be required to remove all items stored outdoors (the exception is firewood when stacked neatly). Photos are provided and removal of this outdoor storage is made a condition of approval. No permits will be issued until these items are removed. VARIANCE ANALYSIS The proposed location of the array does not meet the required setback from the north, east or west property boundary. Setbacks of 4' — 8' exist when 30' are normally required. The solar electric array is considered a structure and must meet the minimum required setbacks. Zoning Code Section 8-210 allows the granting of a variance as authorized under Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.357, subdivision 6,which states the following: "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. 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 the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. " This property is very unique in that there is an island effect with streets located on all sides of the property. The street frontages require 30' setbacks on all sides. Based on the overall size of the property and the triangular-shape of the property, the area proposed for the array is essentially unbuildable. This is illustrated on the proposed Site Plan submitted by the applicant. Staff finds this meets the practical difficulties language of the State Statute noted above. Further, staff finds use of the northern corner of the property for a solar electric array is likely one of the best uses for this area, certainly more appropriate than a building or parking. That is because the array is low profile and will fit well into the landscape, which consists of open area and gardens. The unbuildable nature of this area of the property is not of the applicant's doing but is because of circumstances unique to the property. Further, the existing area is being used for an access point to the property off Long Lake Road. There is a substantial grade difference between Long Lake Road and the area where the array will be constructed. Staff finds with the proposed removal of the Long Lake Road access point the effect of not meeting the setback will likely be reduced because there won't be such direct views into the property.