My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ltr/memo to homeowner
Orono
>
Property Files
>
Street Address
>
C
>
Cobblestone Court
>
2480 Cobblestone Court - 33-118-23-11-0079
>
Correspondence
>
ltr/memo to homeowner
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/22/2023 4:44:30 PM
Creation date
4/20/2016 10:46:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
x Address Old
House Number
2480
Street Name
Cobblestone
Street Type
Court
Address
2480 Cobblestone Court
Document Type
Correspondence
PIN
3311823110079
Supplemental fields
ProcessedPID
Updated
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
Follow-up <br /> August 1,2011 <br /> Page 2 <br /> - The adjacent wetland is mapped as a "Manage 2" wetland protection classification, which <br /> requires a 25' wetland buffer and a 20' setback from the buffer, for a total of 45' separation <br /> between the wetland and any portion of structure (or overhang). <br /> - The building permit survey shows the house set back 3' from the south side lot line. Along <br /> the south side of the house in the area of the existing patio door, separation between the <br /> wetland and the house is about 48'. <br /> - Under today's City ordinances, even if the MCWD buffer mitigation area can be relocated, <br /> a deck extending from the area of the existing patio door could not extend more than 3' out <br /> from the house without requiring a variance to the City's requirement for a 20' setback <br /> from the buffer. A deck extending 12' out from the house would require a 9' buffer setback <br /> variance. <br /> - The code contemplates allowing `buffer flexibility' (revising the depth of required buffer) <br /> in situations where existing structures are located in an area that would be required for <br /> establishment of a buffer. That is not strictly the case here, and would not be applicable. <br /> - It is questionable whether the Planning Commission and Council would find that the <br /> "practical difficulties" necessary to grant a variance are present. One of the considerations <br /> is whether the situation requiring the variance was created by the property owner. Because <br /> the area of the integral deck originally contemplated for your townhome (and all other <br /> townhomes in Stonebay) as a matter of choice was constructed as interior space rather than <br /> as a deck, this test might not be satisfied. <br /> To summarize, a variance is not guaranteed even if you do work things out with the MCWD and <br /> even if your Homeowners Association agrees to re-platting. After the staff discussions last <br /> Thursday, it seemed that I should follow up with you. <br /> Please feel free to call me if you want to discuss this further (9�2-249-4622). <br /> Sincerely, <br /> . <br /> � <br /> Michael P. Gaffron <br /> Assistant City Administrator <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.