My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-11-1995 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1995
>
09-11-1995 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/6/2023 12:48:21 PM
Creation date
10/6/2023 12:43:13 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.
/
291
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
c.The City’s tax records back to 1974 indicate the former owner received <br />homestead credit from 1974 to 1981. The propert>- has been non- <br />homesieaded to the current time. <br />D.Major portions of the propeny are located in the lakeshore protected area. <br />5,348 s.f. is located within the 0-75 ’ setback area and 1,464 s.f. is located <br />within the 75-250 ’ setback area. <br />E.The curvature of the shoreline to the southeast of the property intensifies <br />the impact of the lakeshore setback upon limited building envelope of this <br />property. <br />F.The property has been assessed and is connected to municipal sewer, <br />The Planning Commission at their August 21, 1995 meeting reconsidered a <br />second request of applicant to install a second story' over the 22 x ^2 single <br />story garage. The Planning Commission recommended denial of applicant’s <br />request to" amend the Planning Commission’s original recommendation of <br />approval based on the following findings: <br />A.A second story over the approved 22’ x 22’ garage addition would <br />intensify the impact of struemre on this severely substandard lot. <br />B.The garage is located 3* from a public access to laJce and 5.4 ’ from street <br />lot line. <br />ITie 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 variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor <br />pose a "fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely <br />serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a <br />demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preser\e a substantial property- <br />right of the applicant; and would be in keeping w ith the spirit and intent of the <br />Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. <br />Page 3 of 7
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.