Laserfiche WebLink
� . . , <br /> � O� ., . ' ' <br /> O O � <br /> � �A. � C ITY of ORONO � <br /> � � <br /> ti <br /> ��� �G�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> �kESH�� NO. 318 8 <br /> 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed. this application on <br /> September 21, 1992 , and on a vote of 7-0 recommended <br /> approval of the reguested variances and conditional use <br /> permit based on the following findings: <br /> a. The previous ly existing garage was located partia 1 ly on <br /> the neighboring property, partially in the right-of-way <br /> of Olive Avenue, and partially within applicant's <br /> property. Said garage was in disrepair. Removal of <br /> the garage is an improvement to the neighborhood. <br /> b. Applicant has a reasonable need for storage for yard <br /> maintenance equipment and other items which need to be <br /> secured. <br /> c. Any other location for a storage shed on the property <br /> would require a similar number and magnitude of <br /> • variances due to the extremely small lot size. <br /> d. Placement of the storage shed to the rear of the house <br /> would eliminate the only vehicle parking area on the <br /> property. <br /> e. The proposed removal of existing gravel hardcover <br /> results in a slight decrease from 41.6$ to 41.1$ (500- <br /> 1,000 ' zone) . <br /> f. One or more of the above findings constitute sufficient <br /> hardship for granting of the variances and conditional <br /> use permit. - <br /> 5. Applicant commenced demolition of the pre-existing garage <br /> and construction of the new shed without obtaining the <br /> appropriate pe�mits for such work after having been advised <br /> of the need for such permits, and commenced ' such work after <br /> making a variance/conditional use permit application but <br /> prior to variance/conditional use permit approval. <br /> 6. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this <br /> property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to <br /> other property in this zoning district; that granting the <br /> variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, <br /> • Page 2 of 7 � <br /> � <br />