My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 4544
Orono
>
Resolutions, Ordinances, Proclamations
>
Resolutions
>
Reso 0001-7399
>
Reso 4500 - 4599 (July 10, 2000 - January 22, 2001)
>
Resolution 4544
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/17/2015 11:49:39 AM
Creation date
11/17/2015 11:49:38 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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).
View images
View plain text
�— <br /> � O� <br /> � O O . <br /> ��b. - . CITY of ORONO <br /> � � <br /> ti <br /> �� G'� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> ��sH.o�� � � No. � 4 5 4 �. . � . <br /> A. Air photos indicate the pre-existing deck was constructed sometime <br /> between the mid 1970's to the early 1980's. The City does not have a <br /> permit on file for the deck. <br /> B. At its closest point, the deck would not encroach nearer to the protected <br /> . tributary than the old deck (48' from the OHWL). <br /> C. A deck would continue to provide a landing for a sliding glass door <br /> located at the rear of the house. <br /> D. The original deck would have been constructed prior to the adoption of <br /> the Shoreland Ordinance. The Shoreland Ordinance applies to non- <br /> � lakeshore properry. Section 10.22, which is the ordinance that regulated <br /> hardcover prior to 1992, applies only to lots zoned Lakeshore Residential <br /> and only to lakeshore properties. The applicant's property is zoned RR- <br /> � � 1B and is not a lakeshore property. ` <br /> � <br /> E. The total hardcover for the replacement deck within 75' of the creek is <br /> � • 170 s.f. where 174 s.f. had existed prior to removal of the deck. <br /> 4. 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 tra�c conditions, light, air nor <br /> pose a fire hazazd or other danger to neighboring property; 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 /> properry 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 /> 5. 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 /> � _ Page 2 of 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.