My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 6791
Orono
>
Resolutions, Ordinances, Proclamations
>
Resolutions
>
Reso 0001-7399
>
Reso 6700 - 6799 (November 28, 2016 - October 9, 2017)
>
Resolution 6791
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/26/2017 11:23:34 AM
Creation date
9/26/2017 11:23:33 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
���p CITY OF ORONO <br /> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> �� G�� No. b 7 9 1 <br /> t'�$ESH04� <br /> 2. The documents submitted by the Applicant, the analysis contained within staff <br /> memos, the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the above <br /> mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings <br /> are hereby incorporated by reference. <br /> 3. The Property is zoned LR-1 B One Family Lakeshore Residential. The Property is <br /> approximately 1.83 acres in area of which approximately 0.01 acres is wetland. <br /> 4. The LR-1 B zoning district requires a minimum of 1.0 acres in area and 140 feet in <br /> width. <br /> 5. In considering this application for the Proposed Development, the Council has <br /> considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and the <br /> effect of the Proposed Development upon the health, safety and welfare of the <br /> community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, <br /> risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. <br /> ANALYSIS: <br /> 1. The Applicant purchased the Property because a substandard house was located <br /> on the Property and he considered it a blight to the neighborhood. Further, the <br /> Applicant wanted to make sure that any home built on the Property was consistent <br /> with the surrounding homes and wanted to ensure that a trailer home wasn't located <br /> on the Property, even though the City Code would allow the placement of a trailer <br /> home. The Applicant stated that he paid a premium for the Property and that it is <br /> not feasible to build a single home(valued at over$1,000,000)on the lot and recoup <br /> his investment. The Applicant stated that the market would support subdividing the <br /> lot so that he could build finro homes valued at approximately $800,000. <br /> 2. "The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance." <br /> The intent for the acreage minimums set forth in the ordinance for each district is to <br /> maintain and control density to the desired levels. This Proposed Development <br /> proposes creation of a property which is nonconforming with respect to area and is <br /> not in harmony with the ordinance. This criterion is not met. <br /> 3. "The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan." The primary goal within <br /> the Comprehensive Plan has been, and continues to be, the preservation of the <br /> lake and natural environment. The Comprehensive Plan finds that high density in <br /> the Shoreland senres to harm the lake water quality because of increased <br /> impervious surfaces, runoff, and a loss of natural vegetative buffer areas. The <br /> minimum lot sizes are intended to address overcrowding of the lake and the <br /> designated Shoreland area, thus preservation of the lake quality. The Proposed <br /> Development resulting in the addition of a second lot is inconsistent with the density <br /> 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.