My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 4974
Orono
>
Resolutions
>
Resolution 0001-7547
>
Reso 4900 - 4999 (November 25,2002 - June 23,2003)
>
Resolution 4974
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/13/2015 1:29:41 PM
Creation date
11/13/2015 1:29:41 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
� °� � <br /> • �. <br /> o � . <br /> - � CITY of ORONO <br /> � -- :. � � <br /> , ti <br /> ��� �G�' � '- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> `9kESYiOg' NO. �° � `� � <br /> E. No action was taken by�the applicant, and he sold the property to the <br /> owners in January 2003. <br /> F. In February and March 2003 the Building Official sent letters to the <br /> � applicant in a further attempt to gain compliance, which resulted in this <br /> application. <br /> 5. The City Council finds that the increases in structural coverage and encroachment <br /> of a second story 5' into the average lakeshore setback must necessarily be <br /> granted in conjunction with any after-the-fact approval of the second story deck. <br /> 6. The City Council finds that while the second story deck construction should not -- -�--------�� <br /> have occurred, denial of the after-the-fact variances would unfairly penalize the <br /> owners who purchased the property from the applicant with no knowledge that <br /> the deck was not in compliance. <br /> • 7. The Council further finds that the circumstance that the Ci failed to file a <br /> tY <br /> timely written notice to the applicant of the violations act as a hardship which <br /> � supports the granting of the requested after-the-fact variances. <br /> 8. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar <br /> � to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that <br /> granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor <br /> pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properly; would not merely <br /> serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a <br /> demonstrable hardship or .difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial <br /> property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and <br /> _ intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. � <br /> 9. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and <br /> recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments <br /> by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and <br /> welfare of the community. <br /> � <br /> Page 3 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.