Laserfiche WebLink
, ' �► <br /> � <br /> �--- <br /> � O� • <br /> O O <br /> �,. CITY of ORONO <br /> � � <br /> �� �,'�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> ��s�oj rvo. a 7 0� � <br /> 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on January 22,2002 and <br /> recommended approval of variances by a vote of 6 to 0. <br /> 4. Planning Commission recommended approval of the variance to permit the 10' <br /> residential addition into the average lakeshore setback based on the following <br /> findings of fact: <br /> A. The intent of the average lakeshore setback ordinance is to protect lake views <br /> enjoyed by adjacent residential buildings. <br /> B. Views from the neighboring house, located east of the applicant's property, <br /> would be minimally impacted to the lake based on the side by side location <br /> of the houses. <br /> C. The house to the west is located approximately 120' from the applicant's <br /> . house. <br /> D. The applicant's house is located at a much higher elevation than the house <br /> located to the west: <br /> E. Because the addition is to east side of the house, the visual mass of the <br /> addition is not visible from the neighbor's house. ' <br /> 5. By a vote of 6 to 0 the Planning Commission recommended approval for an <br /> expansion of the detached garage. The recommendation differs from the applicant's <br /> request because the Planning Commission concluded the size of the detached garage <br /> should not be greater than 1,000 s.f. based on the follow-ing findings: <br /> A. The applicant's request to extend the existing building by 12 ft.would result <br /> in a building size of 1,056 s.f. The rationale behind the recommendation to <br /> allow a building with a maximum size of 1,000 s.f. is based on the code <br /> classification of accessory buildings over 1,000 s.f. in size. Any building in <br /> that category is defined as an oversized accessorv buildina Oversized <br /> accessory buildings are required to meet principal building setbacks. In this <br /> case the building would be required to meet a 30' setback rather than 15'. <br /> Page 2 of 6 <br />