My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-21-2015 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2015
>
09-21-2015 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/18/2019 2:23:25 PM
Creation date
1/13/2016 8:59:50 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.
/
418
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
FILE#15-3725 <br /> 17 Sept 2015 <br /> Page 5 of 5 <br /> 14) All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the <br /> public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; There is no lighting <br /> proposed; and <br /> 15) Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. Staff believes <br /> this condition to be met. <br /> A CUP may be granted subject to such conditions as the Council may prescribe. Additionally, <br /> a CUP shall remain in effect as long as the conditions imposed by the City Council are <br /> observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the city from enacting or amending official <br /> controls to change the status of conditional uses. <br /> Practical Difficulties and Conditional Use Permit Analysis <br /> Staff finds that the proposal for the construction of sub-grade retaining walls for the repair, <br /> reinforcement and restoration within the 0 to 75 foot zone appears to be reasonable and <br /> consistent with similar properties in the neighborhood. The applicant has addressed or mitigated <br /> any negative visual impacts resulting from the restoration with new vegetation. The setback <br /> variance is necessary as the critical area of repair is in such close proximity to the OWHL of the <br /> lake and is reasonable, consistent with the comprehensive plan and will not alter the character of <br /> the area. <br /> The applicant has provided a plan which contemplates the installation of sub-grade walls to <br /> support the slope in the areas of failure across all three properties. Soil will be placed over the <br /> walls resulting in a more stable slope and will be re-vegetated to reinforce the soil. Once the <br /> vegetation establishes and matures the restoration area and the reinforcement should not be <br /> visible. <br /> Engineer Comments <br /> The City engineer has reviewed the applicant's plan and supplementary information. All concerns <br /> have been addressed and the plan has been approved. <br /> Issues for Consideration <br /> 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the <br /> property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? <br /> 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the <br /> essential character of the neighborhood? <br /> 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the <br /> impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? <br /> 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.