Laserfiche WebLink
FILE#LA19-00051 <br /> 15 July 2019 <br /> Page 3 of 4 <br /> 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under <br /> Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is <br /> located.This condition is not applicable,as retaining walls are an allowed use in the LR- <br /> 1C District. <br /> 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling <br /> as a two-family dwelling.This condition is not applicable. <br /> 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such <br /> property or immediately adjoining property.The lake slope failure creates a situation <br /> requiring necessary intervention and the proposed retaining wall installation is <br /> necessary for repair and restoration of the slope to the lake. It is reasonable to permit <br /> the type of repair the owner has proposed in addition to the proposed landscape plan <br /> to support a subterranean wall system.The retaining walls will not adversely impact <br /> adjacent properties. <br /> 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which <br /> the land is located.The applicant's proposal does not appear to be out of character with <br /> the area.The walls will not be visible from the lake. <br /> 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a <br /> substantial property right of the applicant. Granting a lake setback variance and to allow <br /> the construction of the subterranean retaining wall system within the 75-foot lake <br /> setback is reasonable and necessary to protect the lake and property, and the property <br /> rights of the owner. <br /> 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort <br /> or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the <br /> lake setback variance allowing the subterranean retaining walls within the 75-foot <br /> setback will not adversely impact health,safety,comfort or morals,or be contrary to <br /> the ordinances. <br /> 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but <br /> is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The applicant has provided <br /> demonstration of the practical difficulties which support granting the lake setback to <br /> permit the construction of subterranean retaining walls within 75 feet of the OHWL. <br /> Practical Difficulties Statement <br /> Applicant has provided supporting documentation regarding the applicable Practical Difficulties <br /> attached as Exhibit C, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. <br /> Practical Difficulties Analysis <br /> Staff finds practical difficulty in the lake yard slope failure to allow the subterranean retaining wall <br /> system to be installed. <br /> Public Comments <br /> No public comments were received in response to this application. <br /> Issues for Consideration <br /> 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the <br /> property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? <br /> 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the <br /> essential character of the neighborhood? <br />