My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-14-1993 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1993
>
06-14-1993 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/29/2023 2:36:46 PM
Creation date
12/29/2023 2:31:47 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.
/
445
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
3.Tlic Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 17. 1993, and <br />recommended approval of the variances as proposed based on the following <br />findings and hardships: <br />A. Lot narrows at the midpoint of the property measuring 55’ at the <br />lakeshore and 35’ to the rear. <br />B. The applicant proposes a reduction of hardcover within the 0-75’ setback <br />area at 1.7%. <br />C. <br />D. <br />E. <br />F. <br />G. <br />Emergency access can be achieved via 10-l- foot corridor between adjacent <br />residences to the east and west. Prime access to site will be from the <br />south from the municipal hydrant. <br />Total structural coverage: is proposed at 1,724 s.f. or 14.1% where 15% <br />would be allowed. <br />Proposed lakeside replacement deck will reduce the encroachment of the <br />average lakeshore setback line by The existing deck is 15’ in width. <br />The proposed deck will be lO'/i’ in width. <br />The home was constructed prior to existing zoning requirements. <br />No additional land is available to allow for expansion without the need of <br />variances. <br />H. I he property has steep slopes to south creating unique drainage problems. <br />The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this propeny 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 a^ecl 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 haidship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property <br />right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the <br />Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. <br />Page 2 of 7
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.