Laserfiche WebLink
1 � <br /> 10. The variance is necessary to preserve and enjoy a <br /> substantial property right: The deck is in poor condition <br /> and requires rebuilding for continued safe use. It is within <br /> the property rights of the applicant to rebuild the deck in the <br /> existing size and location. However, the applicant wishes to <br /> rebuild a deck that is smaller, positioned to improve or not <br /> , obstruct neighbor's views, limit the visibility to neighbors, <br /> and afford greater privacy between the properties. The <br /> replacement of the roof skylights with dormers is required to <br /> avoid recurrent water intrusion as well as maintaining the <br /> existing natural�daylight provided by the existing skylights. � <br /> 11. The proposal is not contrary to the intent of the zoning <br /> � code: The intent of the line of sight setback is to give <br /> consideration for the adjacent property owners' views. � <br /> Rather than rebuilding the deck in the existi.ng location and <br /> size, the proposal sets the deck fu.rth.er back from the <br /> lakeshore and locates it to reduce the structure visible to <br /> adjacent properties, thereby improving or not i.mpairing <br /> adjacent neighbors views and privacy, for all parties. <br /> 12. The variance is necessary to alleviate demonstrable <br /> difficulty: The proposed remodeling is necessary to ensure <br /> continued safe use of the property, alleviate water intrusion, <br /> and maintain the existing assets of the home, including a <br /> large lakeside deck and ample natural light. <br /> 13. Addendum: The proposal complies with the approved <br /> hardcover for the property. This was reviewed at the pre- <br /> application meeting, with reference to the approved <br /> hardcover variance dated June 26, 1995, resolution 3571. <br /> � R�C��VED <br /> � <br /> JUI 2 0 201 I � <br /> C�TY OF ORONO <br />