My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 6065
Orono
>
Resolutions, Ordinances, Proclamations
>
Resolutions
>
Reso 0001-7499
>
Reso 6000 - 6099-December 13, 2010-December 12, 2011
>
Resolution 6065
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/18/2019 2:23:21 PM
Creation date
10/28/2015 1:21:09 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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).
View images
View plain text
, . <br /> . „ <br /> 1. 0.N. <br /> 0 0 <br /> L CITY of ORONO <br /> ,,.1 \\ \'v 4,.., Av <br /> ti <br /> . 1?k,���AYA� � C.) RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> ikestiew NO. <br /> 3. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on <br /> July 18, 2011 and recommended approval of a side setback variance based on the <br /> following findings: <br /> a. The property contains 42,096 s.f. (0.96 acre) in area and has 110-feet in width. <br /> b. Sanitary sewer is available. <br /> c. There is no additional land available to bring the lot area into conformity. <br /> d. Adjusting the proposed addition to meet a 10-foot side setback would create <br /> awkward design challenges and offer minimal benefit to the adjacent property <br /> owner. <br /> e. Additional vegetative screening is proposed. <br /> f. The Applicants are proposing reductions in hardcover within the 75'-250' <br /> zone to reach a conforming 25%hardcover level. <br /> g. The Applicants' request will not alter the essential character of the <br /> neighborhood and will result in minimal negative impact on adjacent <br /> properties. <br /> h. The Applicants' request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the <br /> ordinance. <br /> i. The driveway as proposed meets the City's minimum standards although the <br /> configuration is acknowledged by the Applicants to be somewhat limiting, <br /> hence it is likely to be used primarily for storage. <br /> j. The Applicants have demonstrated that enforcing the lot area and lot width <br /> provisions of the Zoning Ordinance deprive the applicants of the reasonable <br /> use of their property. <br /> 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and <br /> recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by <br /> the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the <br /> health, safety and welfare of the community. <br /> • <br /> Page 2 of 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.