Laserfiche WebLink
r ' <br /> . .. <br /> � O� _ <br /> � ��'� � ' . .. _. <br /> ������ � CITY of ORONO <br /> � ,������� ti <br /> � �� �� �.� <br /> �� �� � �,,�G�' RESOWTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> �kESI3�4 NO. 3 0 0 2 <br /> B) The original structure was built in 1941 before <br /> hardcover or setback laws were enacted. <br /> C) The proposed 8'x20' deck will have the exact same <br /> footprint as the pre-existing enclosed porch in the <br /> same location which was removed as part of the <br /> applicant' s second story additian project. The <br /> applicant always intended to leave the f loor of that <br /> removed porch in place, but found it to be in a <br /> deteriorated condition and not suitable to remain as a <br /> � deck. <br /> D) Hardcover prior to the recent remodeling project <br /> was 32.9$ in the 75-250' zone. The small lot size of <br /> approximately 0.21 acre in the 1.0 acre LR-1B zoning <br /> district, and the fact that half of the lot area is in <br /> the 0-75' zone with 0-75' hardcover being less than 1�, <br /> are justifications for granting the proposed hardcover <br /> variance. <br /> E) The adjacent neighbor to the north wil 1 not be <br /> significantly affected by the side setback variance <br /> since that property is higher in elevation than <br /> applicant's property. <br /> F) The average lakeshore setback encroachment of 4' <br /> has no significant impact on neighboring properties' <br /> views of the lakes, and the low-level deck is less of <br /> an encroachment than was the pre-existing enclosed <br /> porch. <br /> 4. The City Council has considered this application <br /> including the findings and recommendations of the Planning <br /> Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant <br /> and the effect of the variances on the health, safety and <br /> we 1 f are of the community.. <br />� 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on <br /> this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally <br /> to other property in this zoning district; that granting the <br /> variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, <br /> light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to <br /> . neighboring property; would not merely serve as a <br /> convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to al leviate <br /> a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to <br /> preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and <br /> would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning <br /> Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. <br /> Page 2 of 6 <br />