My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-19-1994 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1994
>
09-19-1994 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/19/2023 3:28:31 PM
Creation date
10/19/2023 3:19:52 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.
/
350
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
Zoning File #1960 <br />September 13. 1994 <br />Page 3 <br />Recent Additions <br />The church applied for and was granted a building permit for a lO'xl I’ coat rtxim addition and <br />a 14’.xl8 ’ carport in December 1993. Unfortunately, the inspections department did not call out <br />the need for a conditional use permit, which normally would be required for such addition.^. <br />This error only came to light during the current parking lot review'. Additionally, the church <br />constructed tlw carport to extend 22 ’ cast from the building rather than the 14’ profK)sed, and <br />that carport is now 47’ from the east property line where a 50’ setback would normally be <br />required for any church structure existing as a conditional use permit in a residential zone. <br />Since the constructed carpoii does not meet the parameters of what was approved, it would be <br />reasonable to require the carport to be reconfigured to meet the 50’ setback. Technically, the <br />City should also require the formality of the church filing a conditional use permit application <br />for the expansions which have already been permitted. <br />Issues to Consider <br />2. <br />3. <br />Is there substantial hardship and justification for granting a hardcover variance to expand <br />the parking lot .^ <br />If iIk parking lot is allowed to expand, staff would recommend that a parking .stall layout <br />schematic be provided and that the lot required to be striped. <br />Since the parking lot expansion suggests expansion of a conditional use in a residential <br />zone, it can be argued that the parking lot expansion is in fact an amendment to the <br />original conditional use permit which was based on a specific site plan which is now <br />changing. Please review the 1970 discussions by Planning Commission and Council <br />regarding this conditional use, and note that at that time the practice was to approve <br />conditional use permits without a resolution. <br />If the parking lot is allowed to l»e expanded, proper drainage control facilities need to be <br />developed. It may be appropriate that such facilities be designed to help alleviate <br />existing neighborhood drainage problems. <br />Regarding the additions constructed via a permit issued in error,: <br />- Should the church be required to file an after-the-fact conditional use permit? <br />Is there any reason why the City staff should not proceed to require the carport be <br />reconstructed to meet the 50’ setback?
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.