Laserfiche WebLink
'CITY: <br />'•.( <br />OFWNO <br />i; <br />•;. •’ <br />71: ;• • <br />■' ■^*’ <br />y'; <br />City of ORO]NO <br />RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br />NO. 2073________ <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, h<?ight 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 <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 <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