My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-15-2004 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
03-15-2004 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2023 11:30:22 AM
Creation date
1/26/2023 11:22:25 AM
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.
/
443
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).
View images
View plain text
M9-Z9U • lf72 SkaiywMd <br />Mar«lill,2M4 <br />raft4 <br />Hardihip Stalcmcat <br />Applicant has provided abriefluadship statement in Exhibit A of the August 11,2003 memo, and dwuld <br />be asked for his additional testimony regarding the revisions to the application. <br />Hardship Analysis <br />(Se« information in the 8-11^03 Packet) <br />Issnes for Considcratioa <br />1. Is the location of the new garage mostly in the 0-75* zone of&et by the retention of open space <br />along the south lot line? <br />2. PlanAmeet8dieipplicantsgoalsofpn)vidixigadequateon*siiepaiking.PIanBmorecloselymeets <br />theCity's hardcover goals but paring fiinctionality is decreased. Which of the two plans will <br />Planning Commission nq)poit regarding the garage? <br />3. hdiouldbenotedthattheplanreviewedlastsummerresultedinonly 1952 s.f. total hardcover, <br />300-400 s.f. less than the current proposals. The difference 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 anyhardship 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 Conunission have any other issues or concerns with this iq)plication? <br />Stair RccommcndatloB <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 recommeiuls as follows: <br />a) ApprovalofthesetbackvariancesfbrthedetachedgarageineiiherofPlansAorB as presented. <br />The nature ofthe County Road right of way at this location reduces the concerns about a garage <br />that backs out into the street. <br />b) Approval ofhardcover variance for cither Plan A or B. but not for the l^x 10* deck; and with <br />appropriate conditions placed on use of non-hardcover matgrialf for walkways.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.