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
L <br />#03-2928 • 1972 Shadywood <br />March 11,2004 <br />Page 4 <br />Hardship Statement <br />Applicant has provided abriefhardship statement in Exhibit A of die August 11,2003 memo, and should <br />be asked for his additional testimony regarding the revisions to the application. <br />Hardship Analysis <br />(See iuformation in the 8-11-03 Packet) <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1.Is the location of the new garage mostly in the 0-75* zone offset by the retention of open space <br />along the south lot line? <br />2.Plan A meets tlie applicants goals of providing adequate on-site parking. Plan B more closely meets <br />the City’s hardcover goals but parking functionality is decreased. Which of the two plans will <br />Planning Commission support regarding the garage? <br />3.It should be noted that the plan reviewed last summer resulted in only 1952 s.f. total hardcover, <br />300-400 s. f. less than the cutrent proposals. The di fference is in the request for 100 s. f. of deck, <br />and the additional sidewalks associated with the detached garage scenarios... <br />4.Is there any hardship demonstrated that supports the hardcover and setback variances to allow the <br />proposed deck? <br />5.The proposed non-hardcover walkways and landscape areas need special consideration in <br />terms of documenting their non-hardcover status for the future... <br />6. Does Planning Commission have any other issues or concerns with this application? <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Given the limitations imposed on this site by the lot size, location very near the lakeshore, relationship to <br />the road right-of-way, and the proximity of adjoining homes, staff recommends as follows: <br />a) ApprovalofthesetbackvariancesforthedetachedgarageineitherofPlansAorB as presented. <br />The nature of the County Road right of way at this location reduces the concerns about a garage <br />that backs out into the street. <br />b) Approval of haracover variance for either Plan A or B, but not for the I O' x 1 O' deck; and with <br />appropriate conditions placed on use of non-hardcover materials for walkways.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.