Laserfiche WebLink
�ONp CITY OF ORONO <br /> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> A NO. <br /> 1153 <br /> 'kESH(1)1L <br /> 3. The Property contains 6.87 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 182 feet. <br /> 4. The Property is exempt from the Stormwater Quality Overlay District requirements. <br /> 5. Applicant has applied for the following variance: <br /> a. Variance from the roof coverage limits of 70% <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 /> ANALYSIS: <br /> 1. "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes <br /> and intent of the ordinance . . . ." The intent of the 70% rule is to avoid the visual impact of <br /> solar panels covering a roof. The roof structure is not visible form the street, either from <br /> Bayside (over 600 feet away),or McCulley Road (on the other side of a large berm). <br /> 2. "Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the <br /> comprehensive plan." The Comprehensive Plan includes "To preserve open space, light, air, <br /> and solar access for all citizens while maintaining night sky" as a general goal (CMP Part 2 <br /> Community Plan Foundation, page 13). Additionally, Cities are required to include an <br /> element of protection and access to for solar energy systems (CMP Part 3A Solar Access <br /> Protection,page 14.) <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 /> The placement of the extra solar panels is a reasonable use. <br /> b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created <br /> by the landowner. <br /> the property owner did not build the house,and the desire to maximize the use of solar <br /> panels did not appear to be the key objective during construction. <br /> c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." <br /> 2 <br />