Laserfiche WebLink
CITY OF ORON o a <br /> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> A <br /> �� ,� NO. 73 81 <br /> kEsxo4 <br /> 2. The Property is located in the LR-1C One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. <br /> 3. The Property contains 23,247 square feet in area and has a defined lot width of 75.14 feet at the 75- <br /> foot lakeshore setback and a lot width of 75.14 feet at the OHWL. <br /> 4. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25%according to the Stormwater Quality <br /> Overlay District. <br /> 5. Applicant has applied for the following variances: <br /> a. 75 foot Lakeshore Setback <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 /> ANALYSIS: <br /> 1. "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent <br /> of the ordinance . . . ."Preserving and protecting existing trees in the lake yard is in harmony with <br /> the intent of the ordinance. This criterion is met. <br /> 2. "Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive <br /> plan."The proposed retaining walls will continue to maintain the integrity of the slope and protect <br /> the existing tree. The proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan. This criterion is met. <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 /> The owner has proposed retaining walls to protect the existing tree. The existing failing <br /> walls are not the result of actions by the owner. This criterion is met. <br /> b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the <br /> landowner. <br /> 2 <br />