My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 6817
Orono
>
Resolutions
>
Reso 0001-7499
>
Reso 6800 - 6899 (October 23, 2017 - September 24, 2018)
>
Resolution 6817
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/9/2018 10:31:16 AM
Creation date
12/13/2017 3:49:28 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
CITY OF ORONO <br />RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br />hardcover is proposed to decrease being the site closer to conformance with the <br />ordinances. The lot includes challenges with the small size in the LRAC zoning <br />district and the orientation towards the lake. The lot is also challenged with the <br />existing Crystal Bay Road that runs through the lake yard of the property. The <br />average lakeshore setback is proposed to stay the same distance for the new deck <br />compared to the existing deck but will increase the square footage in this setback. <br />The applicant should demonstrate practical difficulties to support the expansion in <br />this location. The visual impact to the property to the east is somewhat minimal as <br />the existing garage in that location blocks lake view. <br />2. "Variances shall only be permitted .. . when the variances are consistent with the <br />comprehensive plan." The variances resulting in a permit for construction of a single <br />family residence in a residential zone are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. <br />3. "Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are <br />practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. 'Practical difficulties,' as used in <br />connection with the granting of a variance, means that: <br />a. The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, <br />however, the proposed use is not permitted by the official controls. <br />The applicant is proposing to keep the existing foundation to maintain the <br />existing footprint of the home. The proposing upper level addition is a <br />reasonable use of the property. There is no space to build a conforming <br />structure. <br />b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created <br />by the landowner. <br />The applicant is working within the existing footprint of the home, which was <br />not created by the current landowner and will be maintaining the existing <br />rear, side, lake yard setbacks. They hardcover, driveway width and average <br />lakeshore setback are all being altered from the existing home. And <br />c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. " <br />The proposed addition and remodel of the existing home will not alter the <br />character of the neighborhood. <br />4. "Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties." Economic <br />considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.