My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-30-1987 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1987
>
03-30-1987 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/23/2026 12:57:44 PM
Creation date
2/23/2026 12:54:44 PM
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.
/
287
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
►J <br />MEETING <br />MAR 301987 <br />TO: Mayor Grabek f y IF <br />ORONO <br />Orono Council Members <br />City Administrator Bernhardson <br />Freest Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator <br />Dates March 20, 1987 <br />Subjects 11121 Kenneth & JayeAnn Zullo/Agnes Stetler, <br />3160 North Shore Drive - Variance - Resolution <br />List of Exhibits <br />Exhibit A - Memo and Exhibits of 3/11/87 <br />Exhibit B - Composite Survey Showing Effect of "Creeping Average <br />Setbacks" <br />Exhibit C - Draft Resolution <br />Discussion: <br />Applicants propose to remove the existing house on this property and <br />replace it with a new home. The lot is 100' in width in this LR-1B zone <br />that requires 140' width. Planning Commission recommended approval of a <br />lot width variance. <br />Applicant also requested a hardcover variance in order to place the <br />proposed driveway and backup apron near the house, rather than being forced <br />to have a narrow garage entrance with backup apron more than 70' away in <br />the 250-500' zone. Planning Commission recommended a variance to allow 28% <br />hardcover in the 75-250' zone. Note that the proposed house and amenities <br />are 125' or more from the lakeshore. <br />Thirdly, applicant requested a variance to allow an 8' encroachment of <br />structure (enclosed porch, upper level) into the average lakeshore setback <br />zone. Thatencroachment would be ,entrally located on the lot, about 40' <br />from the east lot line and about 60' distant from the neighboring house to <br />the east, Engebretson. <br />Engebretson's house is about 150' from the lakeshore. However, the <br />house east of Engebretson is 68' from the lake, hence per Exhibit B, <br />Engebretson could legally construct an addition exten6ing as much as 40' <br />closer to the lake than their existing house and still be behind their <br />average setback line. (Mrs. Engebretson viewed the 7.ullo proposal in to <br />City office and commented she had no problem with it, and was mainly <br />concerned that it weul,l have no effect on her ability to construct <br />additions toward the lake.; <br />The point of this discussr,m, rind fullo's point, is that if/when <br />Engebtetsen adds toward the lake, it will change Zullo's average setback <br />line, and in fact :ul to would not need a variance if Engebretson's <br />theoretical a,' lit ion was only 1S' out from their existing house. Zullo <br />suggested that it does not seem f:sir •ha' his property rights are dependent <br />solely apon the iis-ight<r adding er riot adding to his house. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.