Resolution 2813 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

�.� -� ..M Clt o� ORONO � • � Q� �`1' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL � + NO. 2813 • - • • existing screening and the elevation of the house substantially below the elevation di the right-of-way, tend to decrease the impact of that substandard setback. b) The proposed construction in conjuction with removals of other hard surface areas on the property, result in a net overall decrease in hardcover in the 75-250' zone. Existing 75-250' hardcover is 54.8�. The revised plan reviewed by the Planning Commission proposes a reduction to 49.7�. Further reductions could only be accomplished by reducing the degree af addition ar remaving hardcover areas of rock and plastic which tend to protect the house from drainage . from the County roadway. These areas are shaded, further impeding successful vegetation growth in that area. c) The applicant since his initial proposal has revised his request to minimize the magnitude of the additional structure on, the property. 4. After Planning Commission review, the applicant proposed • another revised plan (Plan #3 ) , which further reduces the magnitude of the structural additions on the property but which results in a finai 75-250' hardcover of 51.6$, an overall reduction of 75-250' _hardcover by 3.2$. This results from the applicant's inability to remave portions of driveway hardcover located within the shared driveway easement in the northeast . corner of the property. The Council finds that the P1an #3 proposed 3.2� hardcover reduction, coupled with the relocation and reduction in the magnitude of proposed additions with that plan, are appropriate and justified by the specific conditions of topography, drainage, driveway layout, and existing house. iocation that are unique to this property. 5. The City Counci 1 has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 6. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance • would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve - as a convenience to the applicant, but is • � Page 2 of 5