Laserfiche WebLink
r. <br />It j r -S <br />FILE #05-3157 <br />11 October 2005 <br />Page 3 ot 3 <br />over the existing home stepped back 2' from the front of the home resulting in a 46* <br />setback for the 2"^ story where a 44’ setback currently exists for the 1** story. <br />Hardship Statement <br />Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and <br />should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. <br />Hardship Analysb <br />/« ctmUtHng apftktakmt /«/ vaHmee, Ike nuiiiing CommbsloH shall amslder the effect af the <br />pnpeaed verkmee spM iSe keeM, spfely end wtifert of the community, existing and anticipated traffic <br />condMons, Ugktandair, daugpr tffire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property In <br />the surrounding area. The Hanning Commission shad consider recommending approval for variances <br />from the literal provisions af the Zoning Code In Instances where their strict enforcement would cause <br />undue hardsh^ because af circumstances unigue to the Individual property under consideration, and <br />shall recommend approval only when H Is demonstrated that such actions will be In keeping with the <br />spirit and bitentofthe Orono Zoning Code. <br />Staff finds that the orientation of the existing home with respect to the front lot line may <br />serve as a hardship and it may be true that the existing setbacks are not inconsistent with <br />the neighborhood; however the additions could be redesigned to meet the required SO* <br />setback. The open pergola although not an enclosed addition is structure and does add to <br />the bulk and massing. Staff finds that the additions could be redesigned to step back to <br />the required 50* setback and that there is no hardship for the encroachment of the pergola. <br />Issues for Coauidcration <br />1. Could the additions be stepped back up to 6.1* to meet the SO* setback without <br />compromising fimctionality of the home and additions? Is there value in this <br />considering portions of the home already encroach up to 5.6*7 <br />2. Does consistency with other setbacks in the neighborhood constitute a hardship or <br />sufficient justification for the variance? <br />3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br />Staff Rccommemlation <br />Flaming Staff recommends denial of the front yard setback variances, and that the <br />additions should be redesigned to meet the SO* front yard setback.