#6791- Denying prelim plat-2017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

��p CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL �� G�� No. b 7 9 1 t'�$ESH04� 2. The documents submitted by the Applicant, the analysis contained within staff memos, the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the above mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings are hereby incorporated by reference. 3. The Property is zoned LR-1 B One Family Lakeshore Residential. The Property is approximately 1.83 acres in area of which approximately 0.01 acres is wetland. 4. The LR-1 B zoning district requires a minimum of 1.0 acres in area and 140 feet in width. 5. In considering this application for the Proposed Development, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the Proposed Development 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. ANALYSIS: 1. The Applicant purchased the Property because a substandard house was located on the Property and he considered it a blight to the neighborhood. Further, the Applicant wanted to make sure that any home built on the Property was consistent with the surrounding homes and wanted to ensure that a trailer home wasn't located on the Property, even though the City Code would allow the placement of a trailer home. The Applicant stated that he paid a premium for the Property and that it is not feasible to build a single home(valued at over$1,000,000)on the lot and recoup his investment. The Applicant stated that the market would support subdividing the lot so that he could build finro homes valued at approximately $800,000. 2. "The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance." The intent for the acreage minimums set forth in the ordinance for each district is to maintain and control density to the desired levels. This Proposed Development proposes creation of a property which is nonconforming with respect to area and is not in harmony with the ordinance. This criterion is not met. 3. "The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan." The primary goal within the Comprehensive Plan has been, and continues to be, the preservation of the lake and natural environment. The Comprehensive Plan finds that high density in the Shoreland senres to harm the lake water quality because of increased impervious surfaces, runoff, and a loss of natural vegetative buffer areas. The minimum lot sizes are intended to address overcrowding of the lake and the designated Shoreland area, thus preservation of the lake quality. The Proposed Development resulting in the addition of a second lot is inconsistent with the density 2