My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-26-1996 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1996
>
08-26-1996 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2023 12:07:11 PM
Creation date
9/5/2023 12:05:06 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.
/
231
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
Request for Council Action continued <br />page 2 of 2 <br />August 5, 1996 <br />Zoning File #2150 <br />1.Section 10.22, Subd. 1(A) - Lakeshore setback variance for single story main level <br />bay addition. <br />Allowed = 0 <br />Existing = 58.5' (main level deck to be replaced by bay addition) <br />Proposed = 65’ <br />Variance = 10' or 13.3% (existing variance = 16.5' or 22%) <br />2.Section 10.22, Subd. 1(B) - Average lakeshore setbacks. Setbacks for both bay <br />addition and kitchen addition. Bay addition will encroach average setback line by <br />46.5'. Kitchen addition will encroach by 33'. Principal structure is located 52’ <br />in front of the average lakeshore setback line. <br />3.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Hardcover variances. <br />A. 0-75' setback area = 17,537 s.f. <br />Allowed = 0 <br />Existing = 514 s.f. or 2.9% <br />Proposed = 514 s.f. or 2.9% (no reduction in hardcover as <br />76 s.f. of upper level deck is installed over an existing <br />walkway) <br />B.75-250' setback area = 16,264 s.f. <br />Allowed = 4,066 s.f. oi 25% <br />Existing = 7,517 s.f. or 46.2% <br />Proposed = 7,517 s.f. or 46.2% (27 s.f. of kitchen addition <br />is located over existing hardcover improvements) <br />No change in hardcover. <br />Planning Commission recommendation <br />Planning Commission recommended approval of the application as proposed (5 ayes, 1 nay. <br />Chairman Peterson chose to vote against the application based on the proposed encroachment of <br />the average lakeshore setback line but noted the improvements would appear to have no negative <br />impact upon adjacent neighbors). The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the <br />findings and conditions of the Planning Commission recommendation. <br />COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: <br />To either adopt or amend the approval resolution. <br />^.1
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.