01-11-1988 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting

Home Browse Search

City of Orono October 22, 1987 Re: John and Lynn Waldron Property page 3 1951 Concordia Street of the adjoining properties. We have discussed our proposal with thc;:e adjoining property owners and they enthusiastically support it. In addition, on each side of the property, there are thick bushes which prevent anyone from looking into our back yard. It is doubtful whether the property owner to the North, Ragat2, will even be able to view the new proposed deck from their house, which is set back further than ur house, much less from the most lakeside edge of their own deck, which we understand was itself constructed by means of a City variance. The property owners to the South, Gempler and Ives, would be able tc view our deck from their deck, were it not for the vegetation. We under- stand that their existing deck, which exter•'G beyond the lakeside edge of our home, was �Iso constructed wit}. he aid of a recently granted City variance. Thus, the creation of a deck attached to our home would only be in keeping with the construction of the homes immediately on either side of ours. Our deck would only extend from our home a maximum width of ten feet, as does tha Gempler/Ives' deck. The reason we have proposed side retaining walls coming out from the proposed deck is to preserve the relatively flat area on the lakeside of the home as much as possible for purposes of absorption of rain and runoff. However, if the City would prefer to eliminate these side retaining walls in favor of a grading plan as proposed by the Busses, the applicants would Le willing to consiAer that. It may be that there will still have to be some retaining wall on the lakeside bank in either event on the north side of the steps due to the steepness of the slope at the top. Attachment D shows the previous certificate of survey furnished by the Busses, and which the present applicants present as their certificate of survey also. This survey shows the Busses' 1roposed grading with our proposed deck and retaining walls superimposed. In summary, the applicants submit that there is a significant physical hardship to their property, making a grant of the proposed variance reasonable and appropriate. The proposed land use change will result in a significant reduction of hardcove,-, will hault the further erosion into the Lake with resulting pollution, will be consistent with neighboring properties, and Mrill only benefit those properties an' the City as a whgle. kespect ly submitted, i � Vic, ohn B. Waldron