10-03-1988 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ize, and the average eet; and ic sanitary sewer or rements of the City or lirements of this or could have granted a rnership, but the Code for the separation of sewered# undeveloped > was clearly defined :h the separation of a : 1.7 acre, 120.3 foot idth, unsewered zone on to deny on October ed hardship; b) no ea; d) insufficient 2 addition of Section "transfer or sale of ublic sanitary sewer, { a public or private )n ownership" unless unless the resulting the Zoning Code. No nsfers appear in the rties in a situation request of similar Orono. :-lB zoning district or new residences on istrict. Of 153 new com 1/1/75 to 5/1/86, 7 permits have been eparate ownership due [uire additional land sued to demolish and ip lot where a house consistently denied h adjacent developed 5. 26. The City Council has always required that when two or mot® unsewered lots are owned in common, each lot must individually meet or exceed the requirements of the Zoning Code before any of the lots can be built upon and that two or more substandard lots owned in common must be combined so that the resulting combined lot meets the requirements of the Zoning Code before the lots can be built upon. 27. Thfc granting of such a variance would require amending the many sections of the Comprehensive Plan that govern the rural development of the City. The City of Orono has been consistent in requiring a minimum of two acres for a buildable lot in the rural areas of the City where there is no sewer service. 28. In review of the factual findings noted above, the City finds that to establish a precedent that would allow severely substandard lots to be developed to be in complete conflict with the established environmental standards for rural development within the be detrimental to the public, health, safety and welfare. The City also looks to the broader, environmental principals and goals setfortn in its Community Management Plan and the intent of the specific zoning district when dealing with matters related to the public, healtn, safety and welfare. Issues involving the public health, safety and welfare are not only resolved in securing the obvious traffic and drainage concerns of surrounding property owners but the City also must provide its citizens with a designated and approved optimum level of density, open space and quality of life. 29. The granting of such a variance would require the rezoning of the property to an urban lot size in addition to requiring the extension of City services to the property to maintain a suitable level of fire protection. 30. The granting of such a variance would require the extension of City water and sewer to maintain the standards setforth in the Orono Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan for an urban sized lot. 31. In granting such a variance. Council * longstanding, consistent policy in consideration of the buildability of substandard lots under common ownership and thereby establlsn an adverse precedent. 32 Denial of the subject variances would not constitute a takir^ of property or loss of substantial value because Parcels 2 and 3 nave always had value and have been used as required area for the residence on Parcel 1. 33. The intent of the application is contrary to the letter and! intent of the Orono Comprehensive Plan. Page 8 of 9