Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
� o� <br /> 0 0 <br /> '���,_ - CITY of ORONO <br /> ,� ,� - �, <br /> b ;� ti <br /> �� � G~' RESOLUTtON OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> ��kEsHo4� NO. e� e� � �� <br /> 3. The Plannin�Corrunission reviewed the variance application at a public hearing held <br /> on April 1 S, 2005 and reviewed a revised plan on May 16, 2005. Planning <br /> Commission subsequently recommended approval of the requested variances for the <br /> revised plan by a vote of 5-1 based on the following findings and hardships: <br /> a) The property has an existin� house and is within the Metropolitan Urban <br /> Service Area(NIIJSA). The applicant has agreed to pay the costs of extension <br /> of a pressure sewer line down Brown Road from the existing Webber Hills <br /> sewer lateral, and therefore does not need to provide a septic system for the <br /> proposed new residence. <br /> b) There is no adjacent land available for applicant to acquire to make the <br /> property more conformin� in area or width. <br /> c) The zoning standards when applied to this property limit the width of the <br /> home and attached garage to 50', which will result in a home that is longer <br /> than it is wide, causing a greater visual impact as viewed from the two <br /> adj acent homes than is typical in the inunediate neighborhood. Allowin�side <br /> setbacks of 20' instead of the required 30' will result in a house that is better <br /> proportioned to fit into the neighborhood, as long as the extent of the <br /> encroachment of the side yards is limited to primarily the house in the <br /> southerly side yard and the garage on the northerly side yard. This will not <br /> create a situation of increased visual density nor be out of character with the <br /> neighborhood. The applicant has provided a site plan meeting these goals. <br /> 4. The City Council has considered this application includin� the findings and <br /> recommendations of the Plaruiing Commission,reports by City staff,comments by the <br /> applicant and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety <br /> and welfare of the community. <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 zonin� district; that grantin�the <br /> variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard <br /> or other danger to nei�hboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to <br /> the applicant, but is necessaiy to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is <br /> necessary to presezve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in <br /> keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the <br /> City. <br /> Page 2 of 4 <br />