My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-14-1990 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1990
>
05-14-1990 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/28/2024 11:30:22 AM
Creation date
10/28/2024 11:28:17 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.
/
527
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 #1467 <br />January 11, 1990 <br />Page 4 of 4 <br />If the deuached deck is to be relocated in the 75-250' <br />setback area, it would be necessary to have an updated <br />survey to determine what types of existing hardcover could <br />be reduced within the 75-250' setback area to allow the <br />addition of the deck structure. The Planning Commission may <br />wish to table the application if this is the direction to be <br />followed by the Planning Commission and ask for the updated <br />survey. <br />If the majority of the Planning Commission feel, because of <br />the excessive hardcover, they would not permit the deck to <br />be relocated in the 75-250' setback area, than make a <br />recommendation for the removal of the deck - establish a <br />deadline date. <br />Review of Current Application - <br />Applicants seek a setback variance to the average setback <br />line for a privacy fence along the north property line. As <br />applicants* application (Exhibit A-1) notes, the privacy fence <br />will help provide privacy due to variance allowed on adjoining <br />property on north side. Applicant may be referring to either the <br />tram or the deck area approved within the lakeshore yard in front <br />of the average lakeshore setback line. It is not clear. As of <br />this writing, staff has heard nothing from the adjacent neighbor, <br />but the neighbor may be present at the meeting to present his <br />position. A privacy fence at that location may provide a visual <br />impact on the view of the lake. The City has received no <br />elevations or photographs to determine the visual Impact, if any. <br />Options of Action - <br />1. Denial based on insufficient hardship or unacceptable hard <br />ships. <br />2. Approval. Applicants may be able to cite additional <br />acceptable hardships at your meeting. Information submitted <br />for this review has failed to demonstrate sufficient <br />hardship. <br />3. Table pending receipt of elevations/view impact of proposed <br />privacy fence on adjacent neighbor's view windows. Note the <br />fencing will extend 30' beyond the average lakeshore setback <br />line. <br />Upon Inspectioii of the property, members may note kennel <br />structure on lot to east divided by platted right-of-way. Staff <br />would recommend that the applicants execute a special lot <br />combination to allow credit for principal residence on homestead <br />lot.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.