My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-28-1991 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1991
>
01-28-1991 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/13/2024 2:28:36 PM
Creation date
5/13/2024 2:26:15 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.
/
255
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
acY" <br />(IF <br />QRor^o <br />City of ORONO <br />RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br />NO.^ Ci ^ <br />mm ^ ^ <br />Lakeshore <br />Required <br />Existing <br />Existing <br />Proposed <br />Proposed <br />setback: <br />« 75' <br />Principal Structure <br />Accessory Structure <br />Principal Structure <br />Accessory Structure <br />cc « <br />10’ <br />61' <br />__ _ _ _ 59' (second level deck <br />extends 2’ beyond lakefront of principal <br />residence) <br />Variance: <br />Existing <br />Proposed <br />Existing <br />Proposed <br />Principal Structure <br />Principal Structure <br />Accessory Structure <br />Accessory Structure <br />2C cr 26% <br />14’or 18.6% <br />65 ’or 86% <br />16’or 21% (second story <br />upper level deck) <br />2) Hardcover within the 0-75' Setback Area: <br />Allowed » 0 s.f. <br />Existing * 926 s.f. or 15.8% <br />Proposed ■ 812 s.f. or 13.5% <br />Total Reduction » 2.5% <br />B) The application involves no need for a hardcover variance <br />within the 75-250' setback area as applicant proposes removal o <br />major portions of existing hardcover within the 75-250' setback <br />area. <br />C) The use of the existing foundation will provide less of an <br />impact on the lakeshore property. <br />D) The original structure was placed on the property prior to <br />current standards for lakeshore development. <br />4. The City Council has considered this application including the <br />findings and recommendations vf the Planning J <br />t ty staff# comments by the appji-’int and the effect of the proposed <br />variances on the health# safety and welfare of the community. <br />5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this <br />property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to <br />property in this zoning district; that granting the <br />not adversely affect traffic conditions# light, air nor pose a fire <br />hazard or othar dangar to neighboring froparty; TTlaviata''!a convenience to the applicant# but is necessary to alleviate <br />demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is * <br />substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in <br />with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive PI <br />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.