Laserfiche WebLink
:ty <br />use <br />ze of <br />Lake <br />said <br />has <br />ire is <br />tiling <br />)X- <br />r <br />sary <br />ruction <br />perty , <br />of Orono <br />it does <br />structure <br />es not <br />s one <br />d property <br />tcipal <br />[ling use <br />f S32.250 <br />by Dr. <br />■■ i <br />9i <br />Bmm 4 <br />mW'y <br />mk <br />^u‘:- <br />■'imi <br />, i* <br />•X <br />m <br />4. Dr. Seifert has stated that the four dwellings <br />were built and have been occupied continuously since before <br />1949. <br />5. The first zoning of this property.by the then <br />Village of Orono in 1950, established this area as a "resi­ <br />dential" district but did not limit the use to "single faunily <br />residential uses. The 1967. ordinance adopted by the Village <br />of Orono established the R-lD single family residential half­ <br />acre district which imposed requirements upon the use of the <br />property similar to the LR-lC use district which was adopted <br />in 1974. Therefore, as of September 14, 1967, if not before, <br />the multiple use of the property and the property itself was <br />non-conforming. The city has no record of and Dr. Seifert <br />has not applied for any occupancy certificate at any time <br />since this provision was added to the Municipal Code. <br />6. The expansion of the principal building on said <br />property as proposed constitutes an expansion of a non-conform <br />ing use and for which 'use a certificate of occupancy has not <br />been granted. Such expansion is specifically prohibited by <br />§31.109 of the Orono Municipal Code. The city has never <br />granted a variance to that section of the Municipal Code. <br />7. An additional variance is necessary for the con­ <br />struction of the proposed addition in that there is already <br />an excessive amount of hardcover on said property in violation <br />of the municipal ordinance. <br />8. Said property is also non-conforming in that the <br />rental unit adjacent, to the lake is approximately 16 feet <br />from the shoreline and the Municipal Code of the City of <br />Orono requires a setback of 75 feet. <br />9. The granting of any variance normally would not* <br />be granted to allow for yet another intensification of the <br />use of a substandard lot because such intensification is; <br />A. Adverse to the comprehensive plan of the city; <br />B. In conflict with the specific performance <br />standards of the Zoning Code; <br />C. In conflict with the intents and purposes of <br />the Zoning Code; <br />D. Any expansion to the principal structures <br />would help to delay the time in which the property and use <br />thereof could be made conforming unless the appellant agrees <br />to reduce the non-conforming features of the use. <br />10. Normally the City Council applies the well-estab­ <br />lished rule that non-conforming uses are to be restricted <br />-2- <br />.-;rj <br />h <br />Am:Z mm <br />T:m <br />4--- ‘4 '■ <br />’I' <br />.■ 'ir <br />ill <br />i <br />.mm. <br />K-t <br />5^2 <br />ip, <br />ill <br />.,Xf <br />V <br />t. <br />S-! <br />I'-.' <br />•'.f ' <br />I <br />iir. <br />>y* <br />zM <br />^ y\- <br />!V; <br />. 4 Iw5^^ <br />in sucl <br />being ] <br />use bu: <br />confon <br />will c( <br />be elii <br />owners <br />phase < <br />enforc <br />constr <br />confor <br />ordina <br />a unif <br />tute a <br />to jus <br />discus <br />eventu <br />under <br />allege <br />or mor <br />those <br />unless <br />to pha <br />confor <br />of the <br />of the <br />Counci <br />the un <br />varian <br />condit <br />agreerr <br />the pr <br />hereb^i <br />by sue <br />the e\i <br />are nc <br />sors, <br />uphold <br />appro\ <br />yariar <br />provi.J <br />sepatc <br />and m <br />const! <br />pursut <br />the ri