Laserfiche WebLink
3. Wc rtrongjy iti«igree with thii «tatcment Againwefiwlthjhoaictolfaeioutliofour <br />propoty hu let a voy strong precedent legirding the dtaipgof stmctures in tfie <br />aetghboAood (hetgb^ roof orieoiatioii, lade of gutim on <iw side of the property), vireal <br />density, and radaoedligbt. air and open apace idative to ror propoty. Also the removal <br />of die aalsiing garage win have peat positive impact on ^ he visual density and ctaanctcr <br />of die net^bofhood. <br />4. The refeiMice to a neighl*e™BP**T***y *******'*"BB^***'*B********^**^**r********^^**** <br />no felevancc in this matter and should be taken out oi this docufjwnt We are not aw we <br />the City of Orono had icstrictioos against how long a icadcnt was to inhabit a pnifieity. <br />5. Agiia we fed the property to the tooth ofonn has set a precedence regwding this issue. <br />The orientmian of (b sir roof coofiguiaiioii, the increased slope of dieir roof and added <br />heiglitofthis home has sigaificantinqiactfeganling access to sunlight. Hie property to <br />the noidi of os has its garage as the adjacent nse of dint hnaiediate home, whereas our <br />home's cunent l^rout has die primaty living spaces oriented to the overwhdmiqg heiglit <br />of die hooie to the sooth. Again a precedent negadvdyiinpactiiig our livii^aP*^^ <br />already exists. <br />6. NA <br />7. NA <br />8. The statement of'lieafbyldtesliofeproperties'* is a snlgectivephiase. What it <br />considered nearby? I have driven the area numerous dmes and believe there exists <br />nmieious coodidoos nothin the ncarity lakeshore properdea voy aimilar toourprapossL <br />9. Several areas within the LR'lBaone have minimal lots with laiga newer or nmodded <br />Loses. <br />10. The current condition and si vC of die exirtiqg home is not acapmblefer oar livipg <br />(itOfltlOD. <br />11. Agai.n this is a subjective oomment. The borne to die south baa eet a ptccedeatfer the <br />Lsuc regarding visual density end reducing ligbL air, and opm ipaoe. The diauuige <br />condition will be improved with the removal of die non-confemniig garege and <br />attachiEeiit to die hrmn ^ritb die abflity to ’‘contrai" more surfecs area with gntlera etc.. <br />Also there will be th * c, .;;ortuiiity under our proposal to significant^ re-grade die <br />existing site, to reduce fee cunrot draiiiage issnes. The removal of this garage will ntwi <br />posfevdy impact i'.ie visual density and character of the Dcigi'.rofhood. <br />12. This pnpeity was pordiased wife the intent to tnprove die quality, oondidonaad <br />appe&raaoe ix fee existing bon* c. <br />Is ju ra for Coosidention: <br />L TkekH¥fas/mfch:stdtt^d!rthett!vtmpdmkmu27%la.'ger. <br />2. Our gufjpomtu^d goodfa^annprombtsi0m*thavtJust motive UnpactMmtd <br />consequences butposUveones cs w*7iieiuding: therenunnlof a non-conformi/ig <br />garage, ref' .ztUm of ^e barJeo^er areas, tke smteturai hardcaaer area to iSOOaf, tke <br />remomt, a.’uratiam, md^ifieamtredMetioa im area audmeraackment oftba uam- <br />conformin,, deck, tkealUity and desire to aker ike existing oser la mddralnaga utkk tke <br />eke, tkeaf'lty to **eontrat" more of Ae tke area regarding drainage, endflnalfyto <br />Unprove U$j ^^earenar, condition, and guaUty of tke existing konu: Onr proposed <br />d.xign vdUpaeUvefybnpaet tke overall appearance cfAeimmedioUereosnrfonmSng <br />ourpnpesty. <br />3. Our revised prapaeei reduce; Arse percentages to a more aceeptabie 56% kordeaver <br />c;.u <br />d, it 'eagreeAconfermtoAbeaxenenL