Laserfiche WebLink
• ' Y,�f <br /> City of ORONO <br /> 111 <br /> � RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> err eb1T.Y <br /> ' s NO. 2073 <br /> ORON' <br /> FINDINGS <br /> 1. These applications have been reviewed as Zoning Files #1000' & <br /> 1009. <br /> 2. The property is located in the B-1 Commercial Zoning <br /> District. <br /> 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed application #1000 on <br /> December 16, 1985 and application #1009 on February 18, 1986, and <br /> recommended approval of the multiple variances sought by the <br /> applicant based upon the following findings: <br /> A) The location, height and size of the directory sign will <br /> not impair sighting at the accesses to the shopping center <br /> and poses no hazard to the safety of the general public. <br /> B) The applicable B-1 zoning standards are not compatible <br /> with existing shopping center use and since 1980 B-3 0 <br /> • shopping standards were found more appropriate when <br /> considering signage needs of the property. <br /> C) The specific design of the structure with elongated <br /> sides and minimal building area facing the street is unique <br /> to this property requiring special signage. <br /> D) The highway is curved *along the street frontage of the <br /> property and the two curb cuts at the extreme edges of the <br /> property create special signage needs. <br /> E) The majority of tenants have direct accesses from <br /> building and not via an interior mall requiring special <br /> signage needs. <br /> 4. The City Council has considered this application including <br /> the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, <br /> reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect <br /> of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of <br /> the community. <br /> 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this <br /> property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other <br /> property in this zoning district; that granting the variances <br /> would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor <br /> • pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would <br /> not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is 0 <br /> necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is <br /> necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the <br /> applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of <br /> the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. <br /> Page 2 of 5 <br />