Laserfiche WebLink
O O <br /> ti <br /> 'CITY of ORONO <br /> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> t-- s: <br /> Sfl0g' NO. 4 t ``3' <br /> 3. The property contains an existing residence structure and detached garage,comprising <br /> `lot coverage by structures' of 9.3 %where up to 15 % is normally allowed. The <br /> existing residence, garage, decks, sidewalks, driveways, and other calculable <br /> hardcover on the property totals 354.1 s.f. or 5.2 % in the 0-75' lakeshore setback <br /> zone where no hardcover is normally allowed; 4,998 s.f. or 31.7% in the 75-250' <br /> lakeshore setback zone where only 25%hardcover is normally allowed;and 293 s.f. <br /> or 5.9 % in the 250-500'zone where up to 30%hardcover is normally allowed. <br /> 4. Hardcover on the property after proposed additions and equivalent concurrent <br /> removals will not change from the existing numbers and percentages in the 0-75'and <br /> 250-500' zones but will decrease to 4,601 s.f. or 29.1% in the 75-250' zone. <br /> Proposed lot coverage by structures will be approximately11.3%,well below the 15% - <br /> maximum allowed. <br /> 5. The applicants had initially requested a side setback variance to allow the construction <br /> of a first storykitchen addition above an existing basement office room located 1 foot <br /> from the side lot line where a 10'side setback is normally required. <br /> 6. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on April 21, 2003 and <br /> recommended approval of the requested hardcover and average setback variances on <br /> a vote of 7-0, conditioned upon revision of plans to remove the basement setback <br /> encroachment and construct additions meeting the required 10'side setback,limiting <br /> 75-250'hardcover to no more than the existing level of 4,998 s.f., and encroaching <br /> no further into the average lakeshore setback,based on the following findings: <br /> a) The additions when constructed per the recommended conditions will result <br /> in no loss of existing views of the lake enj oyed by the affected property owner <br /> directly to the south, due to the increased side setback from the existing <br /> situation and existing topography and vegetation. <br /> b) The proposal concurrent removals in existing hardcover will result in no net <br /> increase in hardcover on the site. <br /> C) The existing basement in the area of the proposed kitchen addition is 1 foot <br /> from the side lot line where a 10' setback is required, and is not structurally <br /> sufficient to support a story above it. This basement must be removed and <br /> replaced in order for such addition to occur.There is no hardship justification <br /> Page 2 of 6 <br />