Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS <br />June 15, 19S0 <br />Page 4 <br />2. Marilyn and Walter Pemberton - Zoning File Number <br />This matter also involved new construction in the 0 to 75 foot <br />zone. The new construction contemplated enclosing an existing <br />deck, to utilize as a new room to the residence. The particular <br />hardship cited in this matter was the fact that the rooms in the <br />Pemberton residence were very small, necessitating that the <br />additional room be built. The Pembertons also agreed to reduce <br />hardcover in the 0 to 75 foot zone. The Pembertons* variance <br />application was granted. <br />The hardship in this situation, unique to the Pembertons, is <br />analogous to Ms. Kelly's unique hardship. Ms. Kelly has a home in <br />which the entire side facing the lake has large picture windows. <br />There are three sets of large sliding glass doors, which naturally <br />contemplate an expansive, elaborate deck. Further, the lay of Ms. <br />Kelly's laid is such that it will accommodate a multi-level deck. <br />3. James A. Mulvanny - Zoning File Number 1459. This matter <br />involved an eight-foot room addition to an existing residence. The <br />application impacted upon the average lakeshore setback requirement <br />and hardcover. <br />In granting Mr. Mulvanny's variance application, the City <br />Council found that the eight-foot encroachment over the average <br />lakeshore setback line would hav#» "no significant impact on lake <br />views enjoyed by neighboring property owners." In addition, the <br />Council indicated that the significant areas of hardcover on the <br />property were necessary for functional use, but indicated that a <br />slight decrease was commendable. <br />It seems the hardship in this matter was the small rooms in <br />tl-yi house. The small bedroom and kitchen area in the home * <br />considered a hardship, justifying the zoning variance. <br />Again, this matter is analogous to Ms. Kelly's matter. Ms. <br />Kelly's plans have no significant impact on lake views enjoyed by <br />neighboring property owners. Further, she h similar hardship, <br />in that the architecture of he - rea.i-’ence le tself to the type <br />of deck she proposes to build. <br />It is for these reasons hac Ms. Kelly requests her zoning <br />variances. By granting Ms. Kel.’v's zonl.ig variances, the Council <br />will be acting in a manner --stint, reasonable, and in <br />accordance with similar variance ^ ations.