My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 2921
Orono
>
Resolutions, Ordinances, Proclamations
>
Resolutions
>
Reso 0001-7399
>
Reso 2900 - 2999 (November 13, 1990 - July 23, 1991)
>
Resolution 2921
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/6/2018 12:02:00 PM
Creation date
9/6/2018 12:01:59 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
cit� o� oR,oNo <br /> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCI L <br /> � NO. 2921 <br /> • - • • <br /> 1) Lakeshore setback: <br /> Required = 75 ' <br /> Existing PrinciFal Structure = 55 ' <br /> Existing Accessnry Structure = 10 ' <br /> ProFosed Principal Structure = 61' <br /> ProFcsed Accessory Structure = 59 ' fsecond level deck <br /> extends 2 ' beyond lakefront of principal <br /> residence) <br /> Variance: <br /> " Existing Principal Structure = 20 ' or 26$ <br /> ProFcsed Principal Structure = 14 ' or 18 . 6$ <br /> Existing Accessory Structure = 65 ' or 86� <br /> ProFosed Accessory Structure = 16 ' or 21$ (second story <br /> ugper level deck) <br /> 2 ) Hardcaver within the 0-75 ' Setback Area: <br /> Allowed = 0 s.f. <br /> Existing = 926 s.f. or 15.8� <br /> ProFosed = 812 s.f. or 13 .5$ <br /> Total Reduction = 2.5� <br /> B) The apFlication involves no need for a hardcover variance <br /> within the 75-250' setback area as app licant groposes removal of <br /> major portions of existing hardcover within the 75-250' setback <br /> area. <br /> C) The use of the existing foundation will provide less of an <br /> impact on the lakeshore proFerty. <br /> D) The ariginal structure was placed on the property prior to <br /> current standards for lakeshore develapment. <br /> 4. The City Council has considered this aFplicatian including the <br /> findings and recommendations of the Planning Commissicn, reForts by <br /> City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed <br /> variances on the health, safety and we lfare of the community. <br /> 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this <br /> progerty are geculiar to it and do not apply generally to other <br /> FroFerty in this zoninq district; that granting the variances would <br /> nct adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire <br /> hazard or other danger to neighboriag property; would not merely serve <br /> as a convenience to the app licant, but is necessary to al leviate a <br /> demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a <br /> substantial property right of the app licant; and would be i� keeFing <br /> with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan <br /> of the City. <br /> Page 2 of 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.