My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-21-1997 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
07-21-1997 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/6/2023 9:12:03 AM
Creation date
9/6/2023 9:04:16 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.
/
426
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).
View images
View plain text
t <br />GITYof ORONO <br />ETHECIT <br />8737RESOLUTION OtTHEJIlTY COUNCIL <br />NO. _ <br />3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 17, 1996 and <br />recommended approval of the proposed variances on a \ ote of 7 to 0 based upon <br />the following findings: <br />A. <br />B. <br />Since all proposed additions meet the 50’ street setback, no steet setback <br />vari: nee is required. <br />The location of the proposed additions to the east of the existing house <br />and as near as 5' to the east side lot line is appropriate based on the <br />following unique findings: <br />1. Additions of the same magnitude as those proposed could not be <br />located elsewhere on the property without encroaching the 50' <br />required street setback or the 150' required lakeshore setback. <br />2.WOtile the property is approximately 1.5 acres in dry buildable <br />area above of the OHWl of Lake Classen, the buildable envelope <br />due to the required setbacks is only 1.800 s.f. <br />3.If additions were constmeted to the southwest or south of the <br />house, they would eliminate the existing flat back yard area, <br />resulting in a steep slope directly behind the house. Given the <br />proximity of County E.oad 6, it would be appropriate to retain a <br />usable yard on the south side of the house. <br />4.Topography is generally sloping towards the applicants' property, <br />hence any additional drainage near the lot line caused by the <br />proposed additions wiil only impact the applicants, not the <br />neighboring property owner. <br />5.The proposed proximity to the lot line may have a negative <br />impact on existing screening between applicants' house and the <br />neighboring house to the east, however the neighboring property <br />owner has indicated this is not a concern. <br />Page 2 of 6 <br />•i <br />1
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.