My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-12-1990 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1990
>
03-12-1990 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/8/2024 10:35:23 AM
Creation date
10/8/2024 10:19:51 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.
/
820
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
A RESOLDTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 & 2, SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8, AND GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILE #1468B Meyer at 375-0336, iry at 338-3873. <br />i.-.- <br />BACKGROUND1. George and Sally Pillsbury (hereinafter *the applicants') are the owners of the property located at 1300 Bracketts Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter 'City') and legally described on Exhibit A attached (hereinafter the 'property').2. The applicants have made application to the City of Orono for variances to (a) Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2, (b) Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to construct a greenhouse addition and a retaining wall within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone, resulting in structure and <br />hardcover in the 0-75' zone where no structure or hardcover is <br />normally allowed, and which greenhouse addition encroacnes past <br />the defined average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment <br />is normally allowed, and further (c) requesting a conditional use <br />permit for grading work within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone <br />per Section in.03, S\ibdivision 19. <br />3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed the <br />application October 16, 1989 and recommended approval of the <br />proposed variances and conditional use permit on a vote of 5-2, <br />based on the following findings: <br />A) The average lakeshore setback encroachment will <br />not impair any existing lake views enjoyed by neighboring <br />property owners. <br />B) The retaining wall and associated grading <br />proposed at the top of the lakeshore bank is necessary for <br />preservation of the lakeshore bank, which is currently <br />exhibiting some slumping effect. The 24'-30' proposed <br />height of the single proposed retaining wall is low enough <br />that the wall can be easily screened using existing and <br />additional vegetation coupled with the stone construction <br />materials proposed. <br />C) The proposed hardcover increase from 5.7% up to <br />7.6% (based on the extent and size of the improvements at <br />that date) in the 0-75' setback zone is relatively minor <br />in its impact on the lake given the relatively large 0-75' <br />zone. Further, the effect of the additional hardcover in <br />Page 1 of 5
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.