Laserfiche WebLink
. . i , <br /> Cit� of ORONO <br /> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> • NO. ��7t� <br /> • _ • • <br /> b) This is 2 ,780 s. f. less hardcover than proposed � <br /> in the plan received on June 20, 1980. <br /> c) This is 980 s. f. less hardcover than the 6, 500 s. f. <br /> proposed in the plan approved by Resolution No. 851. <br /> d) A finding of Resolution No. 851 was that no hardcover <br /> variance was required because in 1977 the gravel <br /> driveway proposed was not at that time considered <br /> to be hardcover, in which case the total hardcover <br /> would have been less than the maximum 25� permitted <br /> by 34. 202 . " <br /> e) If the gravel driveway had been considered to be <br /> hardcover in 1977 , the plan as approved by Resolution <br /> No. 851 would have required an 8o hardcover variance. <br /> f) Since 1977, the policy and interpretation of the <br /> Planning Commission and Council has changed because <br /> of reviews of other applications and now gravel <br /> surfaced driveways are considered to be "hardcover" <br /> � for purposes of Section 34 . 202 . <br /> g) Considering the driveway to be hardcover in both <br /> instances means that the 1980 plan contains less <br /> total hardcover than the previously approved 1977 <br /> plan. <br /> 15 . The carriage house, presently in existence on the lot, <br /> was in existence at the time of the passage of applicable <br /> ordinances as well as at the time when Mr. Rhode ' s 1ot <br /> was created and given its description as presently recorded. <br /> 16 . Rhode ' s original 1977 plan proposed conversion of the <br /> existing carriage house into a guest house. This plan <br /> was later amended to use of the carriage house as an <br /> accessory building for storage only. <br /> a) Resolution No. 851 made a finding as follows : <br /> "Mr. Rhode ' s proposed use of the carriage house <br /> for storage of his passenger cars and personal <br /> belongings does not qualify the house as a garage <br /> and therefore an accessory structure. The carriage <br /> house is in excess of the size limitatians for an . <br /> accessory use. Such a continued use of the carriage <br /> house would be adverse to the in�ent and purposes of <br /> the Zoning Code , would res�zlt in ciiminution in value <br /> to the surrounding property. Plans for the house <br /> show construction of adequate garage and storage space <br /> attached to the home. There would be too much hardcover <br /> if the carriage house remained and the proposed house <br /> was constructed. " ' <br /> PAGE�_OF �� � <br />