06-14-1993 Council Minutes2 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 24, 1993 ZONING FILE #1811 - CONT. In staff’s opinion, vased on a letter received from the DNR, the City’s codes are in compliance with the DNR regulations and the City may grant the variance If the City finds a hardship exists. He stated previous to 1984, the City would not have considered a variance for common ownership property. He referred to a study in 1983 regarding common ownership revealing the number of lots in the City in common ownership and the size of lots throughout the various zoning districts, and concluded that the number of common ownership lots that might eno up requesting variances is relatively small compared to the number of properties in the varous zones, and therefore upon the recommendation of the City Attorneys at that time, changed the policy to accept variance applications for common ownership lots. Gaffron noted that the first and second renewals were fairly non- controversial using the same documentation and hardship statement as the original approval. It appears the neighborhood now questions whether or not this variance should be g*^anted. Staunton said there is still some dispute whether the DNR shoreland regulations would prohibit approval of a variance He opined that the regulations provide an opportunity for a variance and the DNR regulations were only designed as guidelines for development of the City ordinance. He felt the real issue for this case is whether or not a hardship exists to allow the granting of a variance. Mayor Cal lahan asked If It wac, the CI ty Attorney ’ s opinion that the Council’s only task is to apply the City codes. Staunton concurred. Mayor Callahan read a letter from Robert Hare, realtor for the Bielkes. Tom Zappia, attorney for Remien, felt the real Issue Is the variance under the Orono ordinance. The primary issues are: the property in question has a history of variance approval proclaiming buiI dabiIity; the applicant acouired it as a buildable lot; there is no other reasonable use for the property; and the variance would not adversely impact the neighborhood as there are several other substandard lots in the area. Warren Bielke, 3241 Casco Circle, said he purchased his property in November 1905 and at the time the former owner of this lot requested a variance which both he and Remien stated objections to. Mr. Remien purchased the vacant parcel after that variance was approved to use for the addition to his residence. a 1