My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-13-1985 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1985
>
05-13-1985 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/20/2025 11:32:44 AM
Creation date
11/20/2025 11:24:01 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
362
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
City of ORONO <br />RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br />NO. <br />2. Condition 4 of Resolution 41341 stated in part that "All <br />proposed structures and additional improv.ements must meet <br />the 75' setback from the la'eshore." <br />3. The concrete patios are considered structures and were <br />installed without a permit being issued in violation of the <br />lakeshore setback and hardcover zoning code requirements, <br />which allow 0% hardcover and no improvements in the 0-75' <br />lakeshore setback zone. <br />4. Applicant has not demonstrated that a substantial hard- <br />ship exists. <br />5. Construction of an 8' fence as proposed would be detri- <br />mental to the neighborhood and would decrease the lake views <br />for the neighboring residences on Eastlake Street. <br />6. The granting of the required variances would result in <br />the following violations of Section 10.08, Subdivision 3 (A) <br />of the Zoning Code with which the applicant must first <br />comply before the requested variances can be granted: <br />a) In review of the factual findings noted above, the <br />plight of this applicant was created by his own actions <br />and has nothing to do with a unique hardship related to <br />the land. <br />b) There are no special conditions applying to the <br />land in question which are peculiar to the land or <br />immediately adjoining property. <br />c) The granting of the application is not necessary <br />for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial <br />property right of the applicant. <br />d) The granting of the variances would be contrary to <br />the intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan. <br />e) The granting of the variances will serve mainly as <br />a convenience to the appxicant, and is not necessary to <br />alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. <br />7. The applicant has not introduced any evidence contrary <br />to any of the above findings of fact. <br />8. The applicant has proposed an alternative to the con- <br />crete patios, which alternative consists of the use of <br />portable, wooden, spaced platform sections lying on a sand <br />bed. These platform sections are not considered hardcover <br />or structure when used under the following conditions: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.