Laserfiche WebLink
� , � <br /> � O _Y <br /> O O <br /> CITY of ORONO <br /> � - �. � _ <br /> ti <br /> ti <br /> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> ��� , 4�G � � <br /> kESI'i0 NO. _ � � - <br /> B. The lakeshore setback has been established by the location of the existing <br /> houses on the adjacent lots. The proposed location of the applicant's house, <br /> although not 50' from the lakeshore, is consistent with the development <br /> pattem of the neighborhood. The fact that the private driveway crosses this <br /> lot and adjacent lots requires the concentration of development to be within <br /> 75' of the lake. <br /> C. The proposed size of the house is less than 1,500 s.f. 1,500 s.f.is the allowed <br /> size for structures on this property. The Council determined a 1,500 s.f. <br /> - building is too lazge for this property based on the magnitude of hazdcover <br /> and setback variances that would be needed, but the 1,241 s.f. proposed <br /> building is consistent with the development patterns of this neighborhood. <br /> D. The fact that a shared driveway is located on this properiy is unique to this <br /> neighborhood. The driveway divides this property and adjacent properties, <br /> and thus reduces the buildable portion of the lot. The driveway cannot be <br /> relocated to allow any buildings further from the lakeshore due to a steep <br /> grade that exists to accommodate the approach for the channel bridge. Any <br /> relocation of the private driveway further to the north would require removal <br /> of large amounts of the hillside and installation of retaining walls and <br /> , additional hardcover on the property. It is concluded the best option to <br /> protect the County Road and the lake(by not allowing additional hardcover) <br /> is to allow the house to be located closer to the lakeshore. <br /> E. The variances are justified as the private road shall be left in its current <br /> location while encouraging an unproved width for the entire driveway of 24'. <br /> 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property aze peculiaz to it <br /> and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district;that granting the <br /> variances will not adversely affect traffic conditions,light,air,nor pose a fire hazard <br /> or other danger to neighboring properiy;would not merely serve as a convenience to <br /> the applicants,but is necessar�to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty;is <br /> necessary to preserve a substantial properiy right of the applicants;and would be in <br /> keeping wzth the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the <br /> City. <br /> Page 4 of 8 <br />