Laserfiche WebLink
O 0 <br /> ., #0� CITY of ORONO <br /> it, <br /> ��� 1��� i ,� �0ti RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> `9kESII�� NO. '5247 <br /> 3. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing <br /> held on October 18, 2004 and recommended approval of the lot width <br /> variance based on the following findings: <br /> a. The lot exceeds the administrative approval requirement for area at <br /> 0.886 acres when 80% of the required 1 acre or 0.80 acres is required. <br /> b. The proposed new residence will meet all setback, hardcover, and lot <br /> coverage standards established under the Zoning Ordinance. <br /> c. The lot at 110 feet at the public right-of-way is only 2 feet short of <br /> meeting the administrative approval standard of 80% of the <br /> requirement (140 feet) or 112 feet. <br /> d. The lot is closer to conformance than most other lots along Forest <br /> Lake Landing where lot widths are as small as 50 feet at the public <br /> right-of-way. <br /> e. The steep slopes on the property will require that extra ordinary <br /> attention be paid to the grading plan to ensure no new negative <br /> drainage impacts to the neighborhood. <br /> 4. The Planning Commission found no hardships that would support the <br /> continuation of the non-conforming accessory building; noting it would be <br /> out of character with the neighborhood. <br /> 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings <br /> and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, <br /> comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed <br /> variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. <br /> 6. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are <br /> peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning <br /> district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic <br /> conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring <br /> property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is <br /> necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to <br /> preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in <br /> Page 2 of 6 <br />