Laserfiche WebLink
8.f. Storage <br />ler that the <br />iback zone by <br />August llthf <br />lered as non* <br />3 s.f. Then, <br />5' hardcover <br />, difference <br />mt 0.2% <br />uiinly to th# <br />concept that <br />>re setbacks, <br />orhood. The <br />would set a <br />substandard <br />f Cosmtission <br />le additional <br />property, and <br />ghbors' view® <br />ty and review <br />the Planning <br />Mittet will be <br />ri"; <br />« 1 <br />rf <br />X <br />■•i <br />TO: <br />FROM <br />SUBJECT: <br />Mayor James Grabek <br />Members of the Orono City Council <br />f cr-r: v:::? ;u ^ 11 ISff-8iS88 <br />Susan and John Purdy <br />1973 Fagerness Point Road <br />REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE LAKE SHORE SETBACK GUIDELINES TO <br />CONSTRUCT A THREE-SEASON PORCH AND BATHROOM ADDITION <br />Summary of Action To Date: <br />• Approved by the City Staff with conditional actions recommended. <br />Denied by the Planning Commission due to "desire that no additional structural <br />encroachment should be allowed closer to the lake shore than the existing <br />house". (Notice of Planning Commission Action Date 8/18/88.) <br />Position of Applicants: <br />We feel that a variance is warranted. The property is unique and the configuration <br />of the house and it’s position on the lot create hardships that necessitate <br />construction of the addition as proposed. <br />Hardships <br />Location of the house on the lot — The house was built in the early 1900's <br />in the logical position ^or any structure but well within what was to become <br />the 0-75' setback zone. <br />Orientation and topography of the lot —The slope of the lot is eastward <br />with the house oriented westward toward the lake views. Expansion of the <br />house in any other direction would require significant excavation and would <br />not maximize the view of the lake. Also, the western side of the house has <br />substantial natural vegetation that affords both shading and privacy <br />Internal configuration of the house — Given the external design and <br />internal arrangements of the rooms and utilities, expansion in any other <br />direction than the one proposed would be costly and disruptive. <br />ProDosal <br />If a setback variance is granted, we would remove two permanent <br />structures that are closer to the lake than the proposed addition: 1) A <br />storage shed, and; 2) A fenced kennel that is being used for storage, both <br />of which were standing when we purchased the house in 1973. <br />Rationale for Granting a Variance <br />The proposed addition is the only reasonable and affordable design to <br />accomplish our purposes. <br />Lv <br />, vv:.v <br />\mi <br />IS; <br />mi <br />Mi <br />Esfti <br />m <br />-vi! <br />IP <br />•V-i\'mm