My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-19-2016 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2016
>
01-19-2016 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:55:13 PM
Creation date
8/24/2016 3:16:36 PM
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.
/
372
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#1�r3792 <br /> November 12,2015 <br /> Pege 5 of 5 <br /> 5. Access to sunlight: NA. <br /> 6. Use variance?: NA <br /> 7. Use as 2-family dwelling7 NA <br /> 8. The condition of having a detached garage on a lakeshore property is becoming less <br /> comman as the lakeshore re-develops, but many such situation still exist in Orono on <br /> similarly situated iots. <br /> 9. The codes regarding hardcover and structural coverage and the condition of being a <br /> small iot are not uncommon on Shadywood Road, and therefore the conditlons are <br /> applicable to many other IQts in the area. <br /> 10. Having an attached garage, while desirable, is not necessary for the preservation and <br /> enjoyment of any substantia[ property right. <br /> 11. Granting of the variances would not necessarfly impair health, safety, comfort or morals <br /> and might improve safety for the homeowner while not being in line with the intent of <br /> the Zoning Code in limiting structural massing and hardcover on small lakeshore <br /> properties. <br /> 12. Whether having en attached garage is merely a convenience as opposed ta solving a <br /> practical difFculty is left to the Planning Commission and Council to consider. <br /> Issues for Consideration <br /> 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the praperty owner praposes ta use the <br /> property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an officia{ controi? <br /> 2. Does the Planning Commission flnd that the �ariances, if g�anted, will not alter the <br /> essential character of the neighborhood? <br /> 3. If the Planning Commission concludes that the variances as requested or ln some <br /> other manner or configuration are justified, what conditions might be imposed to <br /> mitigate the impacts created by tfie granting of the variances7 <br /> 4. Are there any other issues or concems with this applicatian? <br /> Staff Recommendation <br /> StafF recomrrtends approval of the side setback variances. If Planning Commission determines <br /> that the practical difficulties test is met and the requested �ariances for hardcover and structural <br /> coverage increases are justified based on safety and the livabifity of the property, then a <br /> recommendation for approval would be in order. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.