My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-24-1997 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1997
>
11-24-1997 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/1/2023 10:37:11 AM
Creation date
8/1/2023 10:35:08 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.
/
229
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
Issues <br />1. <br />2. <br />3. <br />4. <br />5. <br />6. <br />The proposed addition would not further encroach on the rear lot line beyond what is <br />existing. The existing deck, residence and proposed additions are 5', 7’ and 16.1' from the <br />rear lot line, respectively. <br />The topography slopes downhill 10' away from the west side of the existing <br />residence where the proposed addition would be located if it was to meet the required rear <br />setback. <br />The adjacent property to the south is heavily wooded and will not experience a negative <br />impact. <br />A rear yeud variance was granted in 1975 allowing a rear addition located 9' from the rear <br />lot line where 26' was existing at the time. According to the most recent survey <br />(Attachment F), the residence is actually located 7' from the rear lot line. Attachment J is <br />the City Council minutes approving the previous variance citing the lot being wider than <br />deep and that the rear lot line of the subject property abuts what is considered to be the <br />side lot line for the property to the south. The existing deck is locatedfrom the rear lot <br />line was issued a building permit in 1981 without the granting of variances. It is likely <br />this was considered a non-encroachment at the time according to the Senior Planning <br />Coordinator. <br />Wood retaining walls with landscaping are located on the neighboring property to the <br />south. It is unclear whether or not there is an agreement with the adjacent property <br />owner to allow the wall to encroach. <br />The high volume of traffic (5,000 to 6,000 vehicles per day) is a deterrent to locating the <br />addition closer to the road due to the noise of passing vehicles. <br />STAFF RECOMMENDATION <br />Staff recommends approval of a rear setback variance of 13.9' to allow the proposed <br />addition to be located 16.1' from the rear lot line where 7' is existing and 30' is allowed. <br />Staff recommends the existing shed located on the rear lot line be either relocated to a <br />portion of the lot meeting yard setback requirements or be removed. <br />Staff recommends approval of the application subject to the above condition. <br />#2J// Loren Fritz <br />384S Sorth Short Drive <br />Variance <br />Sovember 17. 1997 <br />Page 5
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.