Resolution 785 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

�� 4 � f , .6 ,, . 8. Tract E and Parcel 810 were under common ownership as of 1967, 1969, and as of January 1, 1975, both lots are recorded as being under the common ownership of Warren Ortenblad. 9 . Tract E and Parcel 810 together consist of approx- imately one-half acre of dry buildable land. 10. As of 1967 and until January 1, 1975, Section 31. 200 of the Zoning Code provided as follows: "Existing lots. A lot of record existing upon September 14, 1967 (the effective date of the Zoning Code) under � single separate ownership in an "R" Residential District, which does not meet the requirements of the Zoning Code as to area or width may be utilized for a single family detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgment of the council such use does not adversely affect the public health or safety. Single separate ownerships include joint ownerships by not more than two persons. " 11. Therefore, as of 1969, when Warren Ortenblad sold Parcel 810, both Parcel 810 and Tract E were under common ownership and were not under single separate ownership and - since both lots were substandard taken individually, both lots were unbuildable pursuant to the Zoning Code. If Warren • Ortenblad had retained ownership of Parcel 810, then Parcel 810 and Tract E together would meet the requirements of the then existing Zoning Code. 12. On January 1, 1975, the Zoning Code of the City or Orono was amended and language similar to Section 31. 200 above was included therein, which language applied only to existing lots which, because of that zoning change, placed in new use districts with new lot area and width requirements. Tract E and Parcel 810 were not so changed and therefore were subject to the lot of record and single separate ownership restriction as set forth above in Section 31. 200. 13. The applicant has failed to show any unique hard- ship to justify any variance from the provisions of the Zoning Code. There are other substandard lots throughout the city which have been combined in the past pursuant to Section 31. 200 or language similar thereto. 14. The variance is denied in order to prevent the creation of the public harm of congested streets, lack of adequate parking, and lack of open space in the area which would result if these substandard lots were developed as two separate lots in violation of the Orono Zoning Code. •