My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-27-1997 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1997
>
01-27-1997 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/31/2023 2:25:12 PM
Creation date
7/31/2023 2:19:30 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.
/
309
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
Zoning File #2195 <br />November 15, 1996 <br />Page 7 <br />6.If parking on the west side of County Road 15 is approved, the parking stall number <br />variance is eliminated. If that parking lot is not allowed, is there sufficient justification <br />to allow the retail sales operation to occur, if done so in a manner that does not <br />increase the potential weekend parking problems? Under what conditions would that <br />be the case? Is the suggested Sunday closing a viable control? <br />7.Is the 1,300 s.f. reduction in hardcover on the site sufficient justification for the <br />necessary hardcover variance? If boats for display are parked in the new non-hardcover <br />area between the new building and the lake, how will that ultimately impact the non <br />hardcover status of that lawn area? <br />8.If the variances needed for this project are not granted, applicants intend to remodel the <br />existing building. However, the potential uses of that building are still limited by <br />parking needs for various activities occurring at the marina. Is the proposed office/sales <br />building ultimately a better use of this site than the existing two story structure? <br />9.Is there any reason why this marina should be exempt from providing sanitary facilities <br />for its slip customers? <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Planning Commission should consider whether each of the proposed/requested variances is <br />adequately supported and justified by hardships. Further, Planning Commission should cdnsider <br />whether the alternative of not granting the \'ariances results in a lost opportunity to bring the <br />site into some degree of greater conformity. Note that this application is separate from the <br />request for a parking lot on the west side of County Road 15, yet the outcome of that <br />application impacts the degree of variances requested for the east side. <br />Planning Commission should address the following items in any recommendation: <br />Lot area & depth variances <br />Variance for number of parking stalls <br />Variance for parking not on same side of road as area served <br />- Lakeshorc setback variance for new building <br />Street setback variance for new building <br />Hardcover variance <br />Variance to allow boat storage in required yard <br />Lack of sanitary facilities for slip customers <br />Landscaping <br />- Stormwater management <br />- Specific conditions of approval
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.