04-12-2004 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4. 5. b. Planning Commission finds no hardship to justify the requested magnitude of hardcover to allow the entire 12’ x 14’ deck as constructed to remain. c.Planning Commission finds that there is justification to allow an after- the-fact hardcover variance to allow a 12’ x 5’ deck within the 75’- 250 ’ setback zone as a doorway landing and seating area. d. Planning Commission finds no hardship to justify allowing the portions of the newly constructed deck which extend into the required lakeshore setback to remain. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serv-e as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Baseo upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1288 Subdivision B to allow 2,312.9 s.f or 42.4% within the 75’-250 ’ setback zone from the OHWL where 24% is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant as annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require ftirther Planning Commission and Citv Council r eview. Page 2 of 5