My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-22-2004 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2004
>
03-22-2004 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2023 8:54:44 AM
Creation date
1/19/2023 3:25:48 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.
/
390
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
City of OROINO <br />RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br />NO.2047 <br />Wi <br />6. Revision of the roof line of the 'Existing house to create a usable <br />second story above the existing house would result in additional <br />encroachment on neighbor's sunlight due to a higher peak, and might <br />also require a variance to maximum height restrictions, and second <br />story structure over garage Is less of an encroachment on sunlight or <br />open space* <br />9* Bxpanslon to create additional space outside the existing walls of <br />the house Is limited by the hardship of the small lot slxe. The lot <br />was created and existing house constructed prior to formal City sonlng <br />controls* These conditions are unique to the property and do not <br />generally apply to other developed lots In the LR-IB Zoning District. <br />96% of the developed lots In the LR-IB Zoning District exceed 0*20 <br />acres In area. The subject lot contains 0.199 acres In area. These <br />unique conditions were not created by the applicant. No additional <br />land Is available for acquisition by the applicant to make the <br />property more conforming. <br />10. The second story addition will not alter the essential character <br />of the neighborhood but will be consistent with existing development <br />In the neighborhood. The amount of sunlight, air, and open space In <br />the neighborhood will not be adversely affected to any significant <br />degree. The traffic conditions In the neighborhood will' not be <br />adversely affected but actually may be Improved. <br />11. Because one of the general purposes of sideyard setback and <br />height requirements In the Zoning Code is to maximise the amount of <br />open space, air, and sunlight In a neighborhood. It Is appropriate to <br />restrict the height of this garage addition, given the side setback <br />variance allowed. <br />12. The City Council has considered this application Including the <br />findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by <br />City staff, comments by the appllceuit and comments by the public, and <br />the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare <br />of the community. <br />13. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this <br />property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other <br />property In this zoning district; that granting the variance would not <br />adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard <br />or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a <br />convenience to the applicant, but Is necessary to alleviate a <br />demonstrable hardship or difficulty; Is necessary to preserve a <br />substantial property right of the applicant; and would be In keeping <br />with the spirit and Intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan <br />of the City. <br />Page 3 of 6
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.