Laserfiche WebLink
• <br /> 4/6 0 <br /> CITY of ORONO <br /> G~ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> fit` RESHO�4NO. e3 6 9 0 W. <br /> 17. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on January 16, 1996. <br /> and on a vote of 4-0 recommended denial of the requested subdivision because the <br /> hardships presented do not justify the variances required for said subdivision. <br /> 18. Approval of the requested variances associated with this subdivision is not justified <br /> based on the necessary findings of fact which must be made for subdivision <br /> variance approval per Municipal Subdivision Code Section 11.02, Subdivision 10, <br /> as follows: <br /> A. No unusual hardship on the land exists. <br /> B. The conditions upon which the request for variance are based are not <br /> unique to the property and are generally applicable to other property. <br /> C. Applicant has failed to demonstrate that the particular physical <br /> surroundings, shape or topographical condition of the land involved <br /> constitutes an unusual hardship to the land. <br /> D. Variance from the strict requirements of this Chapter would result in a <br /> development density that the City would consider environmentally unsound. <br /> E. Approval of the variance request would not be in keeping with the <br /> provisions of the Orono Comprehensive Land Use Plan. <br /> F. Approval of the variances would vary the minimum area requirements for <br /> a lot as set forth in the Zoning Chapter of the City Code as applied to the <br /> entire subdivision. <br /> 19. The _granting of the required variances would not be in keeping with the <br /> requirements of Zoning Code Section 10.08, Subdivision 3 (A) in that undue <br /> hardship has not been demonstrated because: <br /> A. The essential character of the neighborhood will be altered if the proposed <br /> variances are granted, by creating additional density not consistent with the <br /> LR-1A Zoning District. <br /> Page 7 of 9 <br />