My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-11-1985 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1985
>
02-11-1985 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/24/2015 2:41:02 PM
Creation date
4/24/2015 2:41:00 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 11, 1985_ PAGE 3 <br /> City Attorney Radio stated that the City' s test for variances <br /> has tomeet several tests . Radio stated that the question of <br /> whether the property can be put to a reasonable use without <br /> the approval of the variance works against the applicant in <br /> this case, in that the property can be used without the deck. <br /> Radio noted that the question of the plight of the land owner <br /> due to circumstances unique to his property not created by <br /> land owner works in favor of the applicant because of the <br /> position of the house and the year the home was built. Radio <br /> explained that the question whether approval of this <br /> variance would alter the neighborhood works in favor of the <br /> applicant in that it will not block any neighbors view of the <br /> lakeshore. Radio noted that economic considerations do not <br /> constitute approval of the variance alone. <br /> Niayor Butler moved, Councilmember L. Adams seconded , to <br /> approve the variance request of Richard Ragatz and directed <br /> staff to draft a resolution of approval noting the following <br /> findings : <br /> l. No view problem would be encountered. <br /> 2 . The proposed deck only extends lakeward as far as the <br /> extension of the west line of the house to the south. <br /> 3. The location of an existing Box Elder tree and the house <br /> to the south are factors which limit the acceptable <br /> locations for the proposed deck. <br /> 4. The location of applicants existing house poses a <br /> problem in locating a suitable deck. <br /> 5 . Applicant has stated that he has removed 150-200 sf of <br /> existing hardcover walkways in the 0-75 ' setback zone . <br /> 6 . The front line of the deck does not and may not extend <br /> beyond the front line of the home to the south. <br /> 7 . Sand is to be placed under the surface of the deck as was <br /> done in the Krutzig application to prevent encroachment <br /> of hardcover into the 0-75 ' setback zone. <br /> 8 . The deck is low to the ground and will not be noticeable <br /> from the lake. <br /> 9 . A deck on either side of the house does not appear to be <br /> practical because of limited space. <br /> 10 . The steep grade of lake starting at about a 30 ' setback and <br /> the average setback of the houses in the area which <br /> appears to be 50-60 ' rather than the required 75 ' <br /> suggests that the natural non-encroachment area is less <br /> than 75 ' . <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.