My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-25-1990 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1990
>
06-25-1990 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/12/2024 12:21:35 PM
Creation date
11/12/2024 12:14:11 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.
/
563
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 1473 <br />June 21, 19S0 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />On page 2 of the applicant's addcindum (Exhibit E), there is <br />dicussion concerning the maximum height ^-f the deck in relation <br />to the directives of Section 10.22^ Subdivision 1. Council <br />should be advised that staff did meet with Mr. Johnson, <br />applicant's attorney, in which staff had hoped the confussion of <br />Johnson's original interpretation of the amended section was <br />corrected. Staff provided the original code section noting the <br />average setback dealt only with buildings. This specific amend <br />ment dealt with standards for fences and walls allowed within the <br />lakeshore yard at ‘i^.iitjific heights. Fences 3*?' or less are not <br />considered an en ,-.Toachv-»nt of an average lakeshore setback line. <br />Fences 3Jj'-»- to 6' were subject to the average setback line, but <br />in no case could a fence exceed the 6' height in a lakeshore <br />yard. Discussion ot ^he height of the deck structure has no <br />bearing on an average setb*»ck line and principal variance review. <br />Average lakeshore setback controls expand to all accessory <br />structures within lakeshore yards, including grade level patios <br />and pool areas. Grade-level decks are subject to the average <br />lakeshore setback controls of the City. <br />Once again, we are asked to consider a fabric underliner for <br />the landscaped areas. Unless Council wishes to reconsider their <br />previous ac.Tions concerning the use of fabric under-iner, <br />applicant is advised that fabric underliner as well as the <br />plastic underliner is considered hardcover. Landscape areas must <br />be free of all underliners if they are to be classified as non <br />hardcover improvements. <br />Options of Action - <br />T«ble application; <br />A) Accepting <br />submission of i. <br />hardcover calc <br />approval resolute. <br />it's ^mended proposal but require <br />survey locating dec.; with revised <br />cns. Staff to dratt appropriate <br />for Council action. <br />B) Provide additional directive to applir**nt regarding <br />specific alterations of proposed deck ar v.. additional <br />hardcover removals, etc. Request a vised survei <br />locating the deck, amended deck plansr revised hard <br />cover calculations, etc. Staff to prepare the <br />appropriate resolution for Council action; or <br />Denial finding the deck as proposed unacceptable and direct <br />totaff to draft denial resolution for formal Counc * action at <br />your next meeting. Council to recommend a date .. required <br />removal.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.