Laserfiche WebLink
. � ., <br /> i <br /> ' � .� <br /> 0 � <br /> � � ; <br /> � 0 �. � ' . <br /> - �..r C ITY of ORONO <br /> ,� -�.;.. � � : <br /> ; ti , <br /> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> ��L �Gti ; , <br /> � . `�k'ESI3�g' . NO. � � � � � <br /> � <br /> '� <br /> � <br /> 3. The property contained an existing residence foundation and detached garage originally <br /> built in 1950, which 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 /> � <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 /> � � <br /> B. Removal of the existing foundation and,building a new residence is new <br /> • construction requiring that all lot standazds must be met. <br /> i <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 existing 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�4ould be in <br /> keeping�vith 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 /> � <br /> � Page 2 of 5 <br />