Laserfiche WebLink
� <br /> � O ' V <br /> O O <br /> ��b= - CITY of ORONO <br /> � � <br /> �� G'�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> L9kESH�4'� NO. ,A�� �A �. <br /> 3. The porch encroaches 6.5' ahead of the average lakeshore setback where no <br /> encroachment is allowed. <br /> 4. The porch increases the percentage of structural coverage on the lot to 16.4% <br /> where 15% is allowed. <br /> 5. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on February 17, 1998 <br /> and recommended denial of the proposed variances based upon the following <br /> findings: <br /> 1. Adequate hardship has not been demonstrated by the applicant. <br /> 2. Allowing the screen porch to remain and be completed may have a <br /> negative impact on views. <br /> 3. The porch was constructed over an existing deck. If the necessary <br /> variances were approved, significant retrofitting of the structure would <br /> have to take place to bring the structure into compliance with city code. <br /> 4. While not enclosed with a solid roof or windows, the porch is considered <br /> structure. <br /> 6. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are not <br /> peculiar to it and apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that <br /> granting the variances would merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, it <br /> is not necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; it is not <br /> necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would not <br /> be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive <br /> Plan of the City. <br /> 7. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and <br /> recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments <br /> by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety <br /> and welfare of the community. <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br />