05-09-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

FILE *05-3103 13 April 2005 Page4of4 hardcover within the 0-75* zone where structure and hardcover are not allowed. The applicants are proposing a slight reduction of hardcover for a total of 48.9% or 2,756 s.f.. Currently the property is below the allowed 1,500 s.f. of structural coverage. The applicants ’ proposal raises that level to 32% structural coverage. The current proposal adds 528 s.f to the current structural level. Hardship Statemcut Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis la coiuhkriiig appUcartoHS for vortotice, ike Ploimlng Commlision shall consider the effect of the proposed rorlonce upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, Wk* to the public spfety, 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 toning Code In Instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the ludIvlAial property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when U Is demonstrated that such actions will be In keeping with the spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code, Staff finds that as the entire property is located within the 0-75’ zone this is a hardship lot. The Planning Commission should discuss the level of hardship and whether or not the applicants ’ proposal is reasonable and keeps with the feel of the immediate neighborhood. The property to the south recently received vaiiance approvals in order to construct a detached garage. The approved garage on that property was a 20’x 20’ detached side load garage. Please review Exhibit O, the Alternate Plan by Staff, with a 20’x20 ’ garage and further driveway reductions a 10’ rear setback can be met, a 20’ setback from the lake and lowered structural coverage and hardcover levels can be achieved. The alternate plan results in structural coverage of 29.6% or 1,671 s.f and a hardcover level of 45% or 2,534 s.f. Summary of Issues for Consideration ■ Structural coverage as proposed from 23% (1,271 s.f) to 32% or 1,799 s.f. Compare to the alternate plan by staff ■ Additional structure within the 75’ setback. ■ Rear yard setback 7.5’. • Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Planning Staff leconunends approval variances for construction of a detached garage no larger than 20’ x 20’ with the hardcover removals as proposed by staff