Laserfiche WebLink
` t <br /> � O� �f, <br /> • O �, O <br /> . CITY of ORONO <br /> ,� ' --,.;. � : <br /> ��� �G~' �� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> � �kESII�g' NO. � 9 `� � <br /> � 2. The property is located in the LR-1C (%2 acre) One Family Lakeshore Residential <br /> Zoning District. <br /> 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on April 21, 2003 <br /> and recommended denial on a vote of 7 to 0 for variances to allow the second <br /> story deck to remain, but recommended approval of the additional 36 s.f. of <br /> hardcover over and above that approved by prior City Council action, finding no <br /> hardship to justify allowing the second story deck to remain but finding that the <br /> second doorway on the first story necessitated the additional 36 s.f. of deck and <br /> stairway area for safe access. � <br /> 4. The City Council reviewed this application on April 28, 2003 and made the <br /> following findings: <br /> A. The approvals granted for construction on this property via Resolution <br /> • No. 4579 adopted December 11, 2000 did not include approval for a <br /> second story deck. <br /> B. To obtain a building permit for construction of a new residence on the <br /> property, the applicant submitted construction plans which included a first <br /> story screen porch and second story deck. During the City's plan review <br /> process the building plans were clearly marked by the Orono Building <br /> Official to note that the screen porch and second story deck were not <br /> approved, and a set of plans so marked was provided to the applicant <br /> . when he was issued the building permit on May 18, 2001. � <br /> C. The applicant constructed the second story deck despite the lack of <br /> approval for the deck. The Orono Building Inspector did not note that a � <br /> second story deck had been constructed, and a Certificate of Occupancy <br /> was issued for the completed residence on March 8, 2002. <br /> D. Shortly after the Certificate of Occupancy was issued, the Orono Building <br /> Official noticed the decks and contacted the applicant by phone in June <br /> 2002, advising the applicant of the apparent violation and advising him <br /> to take steps to eliminate the violation, one option of which was to apply <br /> for an after-the-fact variance. <br /> � <br /> Page 2 of 6 � <br />