Laserfiche WebLink
AppIkalioR Date: 9/20AU <br />Coaipictioa Date: 9/20/01 <br />60 Day Dcadllae: 11/19/01 <br />COUwrn utrcTINQ <br />ocr 2 2 2001 <br />CITYOFOHCXVU <br />Dtparlneat Approval: <br />Naaic Wendy Boitenberg <br />Title Zoning Admiiutnitor Planner <br />REQtEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />DATE: lO/l&OI <br />ITEM NO.: / > <br />Agenda Section: Zoning <br />Item Dcwiiptioa: NOI-2720 Craig and Bev Miller <br />|}25 Shoreline Drive <br />Variances <br />Zoninf District: <br />Lot Aren: <br />LR-IA <br />93.503 $.f. <br />One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acre) <br />(2.147 acres) <br />Lbl ofEihlblts: <br />A Resolution <br />B SufTRepon and Exhibits of IO I5C00I <br />Appikatioii Summary: The applicants own the subject property and are requesting a lot width <br />variance and an accessory building variance to construct a new residence on the lot. I'he e.xisting <br />residence that w'as built in 1973 will be demolished. <br />A lot w idth variance is required due to the lot being 90 feet wide where 2U0' is required in the LR-1A <br />zoning district. <br />An accessor)’ building variance is required because Orono zoning code does not permit an accessor) <br />building on a property w ithout a principal structure. Currcnlly there is an existing accessor) building <br />(shed) located on the property without a primary structure. The applicants have not submitted <br />building plans for the new residence but they have indicated they would like the shed will remain <br />I. Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B): Lot Width: The lot is 130 feet wide at the shorelir^ and 135' <br />wide at the 75' setback where 200 feet is the minimum lot width for the LR-1A zoning district for <br />new construction. <br />2. Section 10.03. Subdivision 9: (Accessory Buildings): No accessory buildings or structure shall <br />be constructed on any lot prior to the time of construction of the principal building to which it is <br />accessor). <br />DlSCtSSIO.N: <br />In this case the accessor)’ shed in the 0-75* setback zone has not been subject to prior approvals, w^s <br />likely constructed under the current 75* setback rules without a permit, and there are no other similar <br />structures in the immediate neighborhood. The shed has no historical value, and is of a construction <br />such that it can be easily moved to a conforming location. <br />PLANNLNG CO.MMISSIO.N: <br />The Planning Commission recommended by a 6 to 0 vote to: <br />Approve the application subject to relocation of the shed to a conforming location. <br />i