My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-14-2005 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2005
>
03-14-2005 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2023 3:56:44 PM
Creation date
1/11/2023 3:38:54 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
241
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
FILE M5-3078 <br />15 February 2005 <br />Page 4 of 4 <br />the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances <br />from the llieral provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause <br />undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the Individual property under consideration, and <br />shall recommend approval only when It is demonstrated that such actions will be In keeping with the <br />spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. <br />Staff finds that due to the location of the existing home there may be hardships to justify <br />granting variances for this project. However, staff feels that the nature of the '/a story <br />could help to determine whether or not the existing setback is sufficient or if the 10’ side <br />setback should be met. <br />Regarding the level of non-conforming hardcover, staff feels that it may be appropriate to <br />remove the hardcover (deck, sidewalk, and driveway) which encroach past the north <br />property line as well as any hardcover that is not absolutely necessary to serve the <br />property in conjunction with variance approvals. <br />Issues for Consideration <br />!. Does the Platming Commission have any concerns regarding the use of the V% <br />story, storage vs. living space? The house has no basement. <br />2. If the Vi story will be serving as additional living space should the 10’ side <br />setback be met, or the dormers eliminated? <br />3. Should the sidewalk, deck and portions of driveway crossing over the property <br />line be removed? <br />4. Will the additional roof height interfere with the views of the lake for the property <br />owner to the south? <br />5. Will the proposed variances have any impact on future developability of the <br />adjacent vacant lots? <br />6. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Planning Staff recommends approval of the request in conjunction with the following: <br />1. Removal of encroachments, <br />2. Removal of extra sidewalk, 10’ x 16’ concrete pad, and any other non-essential <br />hardcover, <br />3. Should the Planning Commission determine the Vi story to be additional living <br />space vs. attic space, staff would suggest that the dormers on the northern side of <br />the roof be eliminated. <br />-r <br />I •
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.