7265 Recorded Res - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION O[' THE CITY COUNCIL NO.7265 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #LA21-000076. The analysis contained within staff memos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the above mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings are hereby incorporated by reference, 2, The Property is located in the LR -16 Zoning District, 3. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25% according to the Stormwater Quality Overlay District. 4, Applicant has applied for the following variance: a. Retaining walls within the 75 foot lakeyard 5. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. ANALYSIS: 1, The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. Preserving and protecting the existing slope in the lake yard is in harmony with the intent of the ordinance. The proposed retaining walls are of natural materials and will be screened with vegetation to maintain the rural nature of the lake. 2, The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed retaining walls are protecting the slope on the property consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The owner proposes to Install retaining wall improvements which are residential in nature and reasonable from a residential scope. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The owner has proposed retaining walls as a solution which will protect against failure of the slope. The existing slope of the lake yard was not a result of actions by the owner. and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality The variance to permit retaining wall structures within the 75 -foot setback will help to maintain the existing slope and character of the area. 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination.