Laserfiche WebLink
[ <br />3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on July 17, 1995, and <br />recommended approval of the variances as amcreled based upon the following <br />unique findings and hardships: <br />A. Limitations on the lot area and w idth of property cannot be remedied <br />because there is no adjacent undeveloped lands available tor combination. <br />B. luxation of home on adjacent property to the north will minimize any <br />impact of the substandard side setback. <br />C. Majority of the lot except for the last 20’ adjacent to the shoreline is flat. <br />There arc extensive grassed areas to allow for drainage to run over lawn <br />areas before entering take. <br />D. 505 s.f. of new structure will be offset by being placed over <br />approximately 189.5 s.f. of existing pavement and landscape areas <br />underlain with plastic. <br />E. The residence structure has no basement area. The two detached garages <br />on the property’ are also used for residential storage. <br />F. In 1982, the City granted setback and hardcover variances for the second <br />garage on the property. <br />G. The property is served by municipal sewer and water. <br />H. The proposed improvement will result in a reduction of hardcover within <br />the 0-73’ setback area at 225 s.f. or 4.8% and in the 75-250’ setback area <br />there is a reduction of 664 s.f. or 6.8%. <br />The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar <br />to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that <br />cranting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor <br />pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring propeny; would not merely <br />serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to all viate a <br />demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property <br />Pace 2 of 6