Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />CITY OF ORONO <br />RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> <br />NO. ________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />6. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and <br />recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variance <br />upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic <br />conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values <br />of property in the surrounding area. <br /> <br />ANALYSIS: <br /> <br />1. “Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes <br />and intent of the ordinance . . . .” The variances are minimal, and as they result in a <br />reduction of square footage they are generally consistent with the intent of the <br />ordinance. <br /> <br />2. “Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the <br />comprehensive plan.” The requested variances are consistent with the residential goals <br />within the comprehensive plan. This criterion is met. <br /> <br />3. “Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are <br />practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. ‘Practical difficulties,’ as used in <br />connection with the granting of a variance, means that: <br />a. The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, <br />however, the proposed use is not permitted by the official controls. <br /> <br />The use of the Property remains residential. The proposed improvements are <br />residential in nature, reasonable from a residential scope. <br /> <br />b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created <br />by the landowner. <br /> <br />The Applicants require a solution to the failing well room cap which will protect the <br />home; the proposed reconstructed patio with landings do not result in an expansion <br />of hardcover within the 75-foot setback. The existing patios and basement well <br />room were not created by the current owner. <br /> <br />c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.” <br /> <br />The variances to permit reorientation of the patio structure within the 75-foot <br />setback will be more functional, do not result in an expansion of the nonconformity, <br />and will not change character of the locality. This condition is met. <br />