My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-27-1993 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1993
>
09-27-1993 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/16/2024 11:09:54 AM
Creation date
1/16/2024 11:06:02 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.
/
333
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
4. <br />D. <br />C. <br />The adjacent neighbor t- • the north side of the subject property has already <br />approved an addition to the accessory structure as long as it extends no <br />closer to the shared lot line than the existing accessory structure. <br />On December 14. 1992, Council approved Resolution No. 3213 that <br />granted approval of the following variances for improvements to this <br />property: <br />Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (D) - Approved street setback <br />variance for oversized accessory structure proposed at 19’ instead <br />of required 30’. <br />2)Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Proposed structural <br />improvements resulted in the need for a lot coverage variance <br />proposed at 2,604.5 s.f. or 16.3% where only 2,384 s.f. or 15% <br />is allowed. <br />3)Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 - Average lakeshore setback variance <br />approved for a lakeside addition that will encroach approximately <br />15’ in fron' of the average lakeshore setback line. <br />Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Hardcover variances were approved <br />within the 75-250 ’ setback area. Hardcover was proposed at 3,386 <br />s.f. or 30.2% where only 2,800 s.f. or 25% is allowed. <br />The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar <br />to it and do not apply generally to other properly in this zoning district; that <br />granting the variance would not adver.sel> affect traffic conditions, light, air nor <br />pose a Tire 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 hardship or difficulty; is neces.sary to preserve a substantial property <br />right of the applicant; and would fie in keeping with the spirit and intent of the <br />Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. <br />Page 2 of 5
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.