Laserfiche WebLink
w <br />3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on July 17, 1995. and <br />recommended approval of the variances as amended based upon the tollowing <br />unique findings and hardships: <br />A. Limitations on the lot area and width of propeny cannot be remedied <br />because there is no adjacent undeveloped lands available for combination. <br />B Location of home on adjacent property to the north will minimize any <br />impact of the substandard side setback. <br />C.Majority of the lot e.xcept for the last 20 ’ adjacent to the shoreline is flat. <br />There are extensive grassed areas to allow for drainage m run over lawn <br />areas before entering lake. <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 arc 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. <br />H. <br />The property’ is serxed by municipal sewer and water. <br />The proposed improvement will result in a reduction ot hardcover within <br />the 0-75 ’ setback area at 225 s.f. or A.S% and in the 75-250’ setback area <br />there is a reduction ot s.f. or <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 />granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor <br />pose a Virc hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely <br />serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a <br />demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary' to preserve a substantial property <br />Page 2 of 6