Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />CITY OF ORONO <br />RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> <br />NO. 7362 <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />6. In considering this application for variances, the Council has considered the advice and <br />recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variances upon the <br />health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and <br />air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding <br />area. <br /> <br />ANALYSIS: <br /> <br />1. “Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent <br />of the ordinance . . . .” The variances for the construction of a new single-family home on an <br />existing, nonconforming foundation and substandard parcel are supported by practical difficulties. <br />Much of the existing home is located within the 75-foot lakeshore setback, in front of the average <br />lakeshore setback line and closer to the rear property line than the required rear yard setback. The <br />proposal is to build a new home on top of the existing foundation and keep the existing lakeside <br />decks. The lot currently contains a detached garage within the 75-foot lakeshore setback. The <br />applicant is requesting to demolish this structure and construct an attached garage in a similar <br />location. This slightly increases the hardcover within the 75-foot lakeshore setback by 155 square <br />feet. The expanded massing in front of the ALS is largely due to a steeper roof pitch to allow for a <br />better insulated roof that will be able to shed snow effectively. The existing home does not meet <br />the required rear yard setback of 30 feet. The proposal is to rebuild a new home on the existing <br />foundation and to expand the footprint for a front porch. The front porch expansion is in the same <br />plane as the existing wall, however due to the angle of the lot a reduced rear yard setback is <br />requested. The construction of a new home on top of an existing, nonconforming foundation is in <br />harmony with the general intent of the Ordinance due to the practical difficulties of the substandard <br />lot size, extreme setback requirements, and location of the existing structures. This criterion is met. <br /> <br />2. “Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive <br />plan.” The variances resulting in a new single-family home constructed on a nonconforming <br />foundation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has identified necessary <br />practical difficulties inherent to the land supporting their requests. The overall reduction in total <br />hardcover bringing the lot into conformance is also consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive <br />Plan. This criterion is met. <br /> <br />3. “Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical <br />difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. ‘Practical difficulties,’ as used in connection with <br />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 construction of a new single-family is a reasonable use of the property. The additional <br />hardcover within the lake yard setback and massing requested is supported by practical