Laserfiche WebLink
any people on the deck will be able to look directly into our living room which has a wall of • <br /> glass facing the lake and a large window facing across the applicants' yard to the lake view. <br /> This deck and everything on it will be constantly in our view and will obscure our lake view. <br /> • It can also be foreseen that there will be lighting added to this deck which will create light and <br /> glare directly into our living room through our wall of glass on our lakeside windows and our <br /> side windows that face this property. We and our neighbors have always enjoyed and valued <br /> the quiet enjoyment of our lakeside properties and yards without irritating sound or glaring <br /> light, but this proposed "outdoor living space/deck"will destroy said quiet enjoyment by day <br /> and quiet dark skies by night. <br /> It is clear that this proposed deck solves no "hardship" for the applicants, but it creates a huge <br /> hardship for us and our neighbors. We love our house and the environment here at our Orono <br /> lakeside property. We don't want to leave our home, but the thought of living with this illegal <br /> "outdoor living space/deck" is unfathomable compared to our current backyard ambiance. <br /> We generally keep our windows open most all summer long and we don't want to hear our <br /> neighbor's sound system, or a deck full of loud partiers. This property already has a <br /> substantial patio that has served previous owners well.....there is no hardship that requires any <br /> expansion of the existing outdoor living space. Approving this "outdoor living space/deck" <br /> will adversely affect our comfort, safety and health. There is no demonstrable difficulty that <br /> makes this deck variance necessary nor should this deck be allowed to violate the hardcover <br /> and lake shore setback rules. The applicants'wish for this deck is clearly just a convenience <br /> for the applicants. The conditions on this lot are not at all unusual in a hilly topography that <br /> was laid out and developed long ago. The plight of the landowner is directly caused by their • <br /> wish for a deck in a prohibited area,having nothing to do with the circumstances of the <br /> property or any practical difficulties. Any variance for a deck would make a major change to <br /> the locality, and such decks have consistently not been allowed in the past. Several years ago, <br /> we attempted to have our detached garage attached to our house but after the design phase and <br /> surveys, we were told by the City of Orono to "come back and talk to us when your plans <br /> include getting your hard cover down to 25%." Our next door neighbor had the same <br /> experience. Properties nearby have had such decks refused and no homes nearby have such <br /> decks. Approving this variance would be groundbreaking in this locality. <br /> We have noticed that the proposed deck drawings do not show any stairway from the deck to <br /> the ground level for access to the back yard and lake. If a deck stairway is added,the most <br /> likely place would be close to our property since the deck is above the grade the least,and the <br /> stairs would further impede our lake view. This stairway is not included in the hardcover <br /> calculations. <br /> We hereby ask the City of Orono to deny the average lakeshore setback and hardcover <br /> variances for this proposed deck. <br /> New Garage Addition <br /> While we understand a 3-car garage is desirable over a 2-car garage,we do not believe the 3- <br /> car garage on such a small width lot conforms to the character of the neighborhood. The <br /> house view from the street is essentially a three-car garage. We request that a variance shall • <br />