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 />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 for hardcover in excess of 25% for <br />development of the vacant lot are not in harmony with the City’s goals for conforming <br />development and is not in harmony with the Ordinance. The purpose of the ordinance is <br />to limit the amount of hardcover present on a site. The applicant has a vacant lot and has <br />not demonstrated that they are unable to build a home within the hardcover limitations. <br />This criterion is not met. <br /> <br />2. “Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the <br />comprehensive plan.” The hardcover variance requested to permit 27% hardcover where <br />25% is permitted for development of a vacant lot is inconsistent with the Comprehensive <br />Plan. The Comprehensive Plan describes the necessary steps to promote water quality <br />and promotes limits on the amount of hard cover. This criterion is not 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 reasonable use of the Property is established by the permitted development <br />of a residential home on a substandard lot of record within City Code Section 78- <br />72. The applicants suggest that reasonable use extends to allowance of hardcover <br />levels exceeding the 25% permitted which is not protected by statute. The request <br />to permit 2% more hardcover than allowed is not reasonable. The applicant has <br />not demonstrated that a residential home cannot be constructed on the lot without <br />the variance. The additional hard cover is not necessary to build the home and is <br />merely convenient. As the builder testified, on behalf of the applicant, there are <br />ways to reduce hardcover and move forward with the proposed project. This <br />criterion is not met. <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 substandard size is an existing condition and there is no available land with <br />which to make the Property conforming. This is not justification necessary to <br />support the proposed hardcover level in excess of 25%. State Statute and City <br />Code allow for redevelopment of a nonconforming lot of record however hardcover