Resolution 7670 Denying CUP Retaining Walls 1200 Wildhurst Trl

Home Browse Search

�0� CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL y� • NO. 7670 t-i''EsH&-(" A6. In considering this application for after-the-fact variances and CUP, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed application upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. VARIANCE ANALYSIS: B1."Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance . . . ."The Property is subject to the dimensional and shoreland performance standards of the Orono Municipal Zoning Code, including minimum side yard setbacks and shore setback requirements applicable to retaining walls, patios, landings, and accessory structures. The Applicant has failed to demonstrate how the variances are in harmony with the code or necessary for the enjoyment of the Property. B2."Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan." The requested variances would permit structural improvements directly up to the side property line and within required shore and yard setbacks, thereby reducing open space and separation between properties in a manner inconsistent with the goals outlined within the Comprehensive Plan. B3."Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. `Practical difficulties,' as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that: a. The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, however, the proposed use is not permitted by the official controls. The Applicant has not demonstrated that strict enforcement of the ordinance would preclude a reasonable use of the Property. The Property is capable of reasonable residential use in conformity with the Zoning Code. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The Applicant constructed or caused to be constructed the patio, landing, retaining walls, and associated improvements without required permits and within required setback areas prior to seeking relief. Any difficulty in complying with the setback requirements is self-created, as the improvements were installed without first obtaining zoning approval or building permits. The property in question shares similar characteristics to surrounding properties and does not possess any unique qualities. 3