My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-12-1993 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1993
>
07-12-1993 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/8/2024 10:38:15 AM
Creation date
1/8/2024 10:34:05 AM
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.
/
400
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 12. 1993 <br />Page 3 <br />Review Exhibit D. Mrs. Rossing reviews the need for the addition and notes the second <br />accessory structure is now needed to house the cars stored in the attached garage now to be <br />converted into living space within the principal structure. As already noted above in the <br />pertinent ordinances, the property with less than 1.99 acres is allowed a total of 2,000 s.f. ot <br />accessory structures. 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 roof will <br />be changed and new siding provided for the entire structure. <br />The City has received no comments from the neighbors notified for the variance re' ew, <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 e.x'sting zoning setbacks. <br />3. Principal structure met zoning standards at the time of construction in 1969 and was <br />allowed to be constructed 25’ instead ot 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 the 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 tlie variance review. <br />2.Mrs. Rossing has had a difficult time with maintaining outside storage of varied <br />construction equipment stored on the property. Staff would recommend that approval of <br />the variance include a condition that applicant be required to store all construction <br />vehicles and equipment within accessory structure and if equipmfut 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.