My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 1768
Orono
>
Resolutions, Ordinances, Proclamations
>
Resolutions
>
Reso 0001-7399
>
Reso 1700 - 1799 (November 26, 1984 - July 8, 1985)
>
Resolution 1768
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2020 2:02:14 PM
Creation date
3/15/2016 11:22:49 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
t . . <br /> � n • <br /> ' v a,� + �f��j of ORONO <br /> �� � � . � <br /> � :i., <br /> ��,i; _ RESOWTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> , ��� � NO. 1768 <br /> � .� <br /> ,�.- • <br /> �. <br /> ,.� - � • . <br /> 2. Condition 4 of Resolution #1341 stated in part that "All <br /> . proposed structures_ and additional improvements must meet <br /> the 75' setback from the lakeshore." � <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 applicant, 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 /> . Page 2 of 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.