09-26-2022 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LA22-000037 August 15, 2022 Page 2 of 5 Planning Staff Practical Difficulty Analysis: Regarding practical difficulty, Staff finds that there are some practical difficulties in the lot configuration, with the location of the existing building challenging traffic sightlines. Staff also acknowledges that the proposal will resolve the existing right-of-way encroachment. However, the property has conforming locations for alternative placement of a monument sign. The proposed monument sign an accessory use of the property and the business is considered the primary use. The proposed 0 foot setback for the sign is a convenience to the property owner and not a necessity for the primary use of the property. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-350– Setbacks: DISTRICT B-2 Required Existing Proposed Rear (Shoreline Drive) 5’ Encroaches 2’ into CSAH 15 ROW 0’ Side (South) 5’ 10’ 12’ Side (North) 5’ 207’ 205 Lakeshore 75’ 94’ 92’ Average Lakeshore Met Section 78-1680 and 78-1700 – Hardcover Calculations: Stormwater Overlay District Tier Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Tier 1 27,625 s.f. 14,877 s.f. Per 1989 Variance 14,273 s.f. (51%) 14,282.25 s.f. (51%) Applicable Regulations: Monument Sign Setback (Sections 78-1478(2)c.) Monument signs shall be located at least five feet from any property line and shall not project over the property line. Clear vision shall be maintained from all streets and driveways. The submitted survey indicates a 9.4 foot distance between the building and the right-of-way. The applicant is requesting a 0 foot setback from the right-of-way where 5 feet is requried for the proposed monument sign. The new monument sign is also creating 11.25 sq.ft of hardcover over existing landscpaing. Staff recommends any new improvements placed within a city easement be addressed with an encorachment agreement and an equal amount of hardcover be removed on the property to maintain the existing level. Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning