Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
O O CITY of ORONO <br /> �+ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> NO. 6302' <br /> SI'i0�' <br /> b. The home on the Property was built in 1994; a rear yard setback variance <br /> allowing the home to be built at 30 feet from the rear lot line versus the <br /> required 50 feet was also granted in 1994. <br /> c. The deck will not encroach closer to the rear lot line than the existing home. <br /> d. There is a door on the upper level which currently has a code-minimum <br /> egress landing and stair. The deck will replace the minimal landing. <br /> e. The topography and existing vegetation screen the proposed deck from the <br /> neighbor to the rear. <br /> f. The Property will conform to the hardcover limitations of Tier 3. <br /> g. The Applicants' proposed deck will not alter the essential character of the <br /> neighborhood and will result in minimal or no negative impact on adjacent <br /> properties. <br /> h. The Applicants' request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the <br /> ordinance. <br /> i. The Applicants have demonstrated that enforcing the provisions of the Zoning <br /> Ordinance deprives the Applicants of the reasonable use of their Property. <br /> 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and <br /> recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by <br /> the Applicant and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance and CUP on <br /> the health, safety and welfare of the community. <br /> 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this Property are peculiar to <br /> it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting <br /> the variances and CUP would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor <br /> pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely <br /> serve as a convenience to the Applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a practical <br /> difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the Applicants; <br /> and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and <br /> Comprehensive Plan of the City. <br /> Page 2 of 4 <br />