Laserfiche WebLink
�O�p CITY OF ORONO <br /> RESOLUTION OF <br /> THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> y NO. / 1 9 9 <br /> F G <br /> `-IkES HO <br /> 5. Applicant has applied for the following variances: <br /> a. Average Lake Setback Variance <br /> b. Lake Setback Variance <br /> c. Side Setback Variances <br /> d. Rear Setback Variance <br /> e. Hardcover within the 75-foot Lake Setback Variance <br /> f. Floodplain fill elevation less than 15-feet from the building perimeter <br /> 6. In considering this application for variances, the Council has considered the advice and <br /> recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variances <br /> upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic <br /> conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values <br /> of property in the surrounding area. <br /> ANALYSIS: <br /> 1. "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes <br /> and intent of the ordinance . . . ." The variances support the minimal expansion of a non- <br /> conforming structure within in the lake yard and average lakeshore setback. Lake yard <br /> construction prohibitions are intended to maintain the natural lakeshore and encourage <br /> development away from the lake. Alternatively, the goals of average lakeshore setback <br /> include protecting views from land into the lake, the requested variances to increase the <br /> height of the existing boathouse the minimum amount necessary to meet the ceiling height <br /> and floodplain regulations is in harmony with the Ordinance. The most adjacent neighbors <br /> are situated so that their lake views will not be impacted by the changes to the existing <br /> boathouse. The minimal additional mass of the flat roof areas within the setbacks will not <br /> be closer to the lake than existing and will not negatively impact the views into the property <br /> from the lake. The lack of elevation bench on the north and west sides of the structure <br /> will not suppress safety and access for this accessory building. <br /> Additionally, the minimal expansions proposed to the nonconforming carriage house <br /> building will not adversely impact the adjacent property, nor will they result in a significant <br /> massing increase within the required rear and side yard setback areas. The requested <br /> variances to increase the height of the existing carriage house garage ceiling while <br /> maintaining a livable height in the upper level are the minimum amount necessary to meet <br /> the ceiling height needs. This criterion is met. <br /> 2. "Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the <br /> comprehensive plan." The variances resulting in reconstruction of the existing buildings 1 <br /> (without footprint expansions), in a residential zone are consistent with the Comprehensive <br /> 3 <br />