My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-17-1993 Planning PacketC
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1993
>
05-17-1993 Planning PacketC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/26/2023 4:15:19 PM
Creation date
10/26/2023 4:11:49 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
160
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 ^^1823 <br />May \2, 1993 <br />Page 3 <br />Review Exhibit D. Mrs. Rossing reviews the need for the addition and notes the second <br />accessory structere is now needed to house the cars stored in the attached garage now to be <br />convened into living space within the principal strucmre. As already noted above in the <br />pertinent ordinances, the property with less than 1.99 acres is allowed a total ot 2,000 s.f. ot <br />accessory- strucnires. Applicant ’s total accessory structures are proposed at 1,738 s.f. Applicant <br />advises that in addition to the construction of the proposed addition, the design of the root w ill <br />be changed and new siding provided for the entire structure. <br />The Citv has received no comments from the neighbors notified for the variance review. <br />Statement of Hardships <br />Review Exhibit J. The following hardships and findings are appropriate for this review. <br />1. Unusual shape of lot. <br />2. House located on lot prior to existing zoning setbacks. <br />3. Principal structure met zoning standards at the time of constmetion in 1969 and was <br />allowed to be constructed 25’ instead of 30 ’ from the rear lot line. <br />4. Interior layout of house limits construction of addition to the west side. <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1.Will the addition to tlie west have an impact on adjacent neighboring properties? Note <br />property to immediate west is an undeveloped City park. The property to the immediate <br />north (proposed Wirtjes subdivision. Lot 2) is at higher elevations and based on proposed <br />location of house, the addition will have no impact. The City has received no comments <br />from the neighbors notified for the variance review. <br />2.Mrs. Rossing has had a difficult time with maintaining outside storage of varied <br />constiuction equipment stored on the property. Staff would recommend that approval ol <br />the variance include a condition that applicant be required to store all construction <br />vehicles and equipment within accessory strucmre and if equipment is to be stored <br />outdoors that appropriate screening be provided. <br />Options of Action <br />Approval as proposed. <br />Or <br />Conditional approval. <br />OR <br />Denial.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.