My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 4949
Orono
>
Resolutions, Ordinances, Proclamations
>
Resolutions
>
Reso 0001-7399
>
Reso 4900 - 4999 (November 25,2002 - June 23,2003)
>
Resolution 4949
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/26/2019 11:17:24 AM
Creation date
11/13/2015 1:20:08 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
T , <br /> , � ' ' <br /> � O� <br /> O O <br /> � �� cITY of URONo <br /> ��� <br /> � �:�`� ,� <br /> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> ���kESI����G N O. 1,� � �. ��� <br /> 3. The property contained an existing residence foundation and detached garage originally <br /> built in 1950, �vhich was destroyed by fire in 1998, leaving only the foundation and a <br /> detached garage. <br /> 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on January 22, 2003 <br /> and recommended approval of the lot area variance and denial of the lot coverage by <br /> structures variance by a vote of 6 to 0. The Planning Commission made the following <br /> finding of fact: <br /> A. The lot area of 0.37 acres is sufficient to allow reconstruction on the site, <br /> where a residence has previously existed for many years. <br /> B. Removal of the existing foundation and building a new residence is new <br /> construction requiring that all lot standards must be met. <br /> C. There is insufficient hardship to support the requested lot coverage by <br /> structures variance. The need for extra storage and lack of land to combine <br /> suggested by the applicant as a hardship, can be ameliorated by downsizing <br /> the design of the residence to meet the required lot coverage by structure <br /> limitation. Furthermore,while the land adjacent to the subject property is a <br /> platted alley, the City does not intend to vacate it. <br /> 5. The City Council finds that the conditions eYisting on this property are peculiar to it <br /> and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the <br /> _ variances�vill not adversely affect traffic conditions,light,air,nor pose a fire hazard <br /> or other danger to neighboring property;would not merely serve as a convenience to <br /> the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is <br /> necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in <br /> keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the <br /> City. <br /> 6. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and <br /> recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City Staff, comments by <br /> the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and <br /> welfare of the community. <br /> Page 2 of 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.