My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-09-2000 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2000
>
10-09-2000 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/15/2023 9:35:34 AM
Creation date
3/15/2023 9:28:35 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.
/
326
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
w <br />if <br />f <br />p <br />1 4 \ <br />A deck would continue to provide a landing for a sliding glass door located at the rear of the house. <br />The additional 6' at the south end would not be required for access to the door. The closest the added <br />6' would encroach to the tributary is 70' where 75' is required. <br />Hardship <br />The applicant has included his hardship statement as part of Exhibit A. The original deck would <br />have been constructed prior to the adoption of the Shoreland Ordinance. The Shoreland Ordinance <br />applies to non-lakeshore property. Section 10,22, which is the ordinance that regulated hardcover <br />prior to 1992, applies only to lots zoned Lakeshore Residential and only to lakeshore properties. The <br />applicant ’s property is zoned RR-1 B and is not a lakeshore property. , <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Staff makes the following recommendation: <br />To approve the variance application to permit replacement of a deck and adding 6' to the size of the <br />deck based on the following finding: <br />1.A deck has existed for many years in the location of the new deck. The additional 6' of deck <br />would be located 70' from the lakeshore and partially outside of the 75' setback. <br />2. The house and deck were constructed prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance. <br />3. The deck would not encroach closer to the creek than the preexisting deck. <br />4. The deck is located on an area of the property that is generally flat and does not slope directly <br />to the creek. This condition allows for surface water to infiltrate into the ground better than <br />property with varying topography. <br />Options for Action: <br />1. Recommend approval of variances. <br />2. Recommend denial of variances, stating reasons. <br />3. Table for additional information. <br />4. Other action. <br />*2610 Jerome J. Hall <br />80 Leaf Street <br />After-ihc-Fact Variance <br />Page 2 <br />- Public Hearing
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.