My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-12-2004 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2004
>
04-12-2004 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2023 10:31:02 AM
Creation date
1/19/2023 2:48:48 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
437
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
M4-299S <br />March 10,2004 <br />Pigc4 <br />Hardship Analysis <br />In eonsUtring applications for varlanet, tits ftanning Commission shall cansidar tha sffaet of the proposed variance <br />upon the health, safety and welfare of the eommunlty, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, <br />danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property In the surrounding area. The Planning <br />Cottttttlsslon shall consider recommending approval for variances from tlte literal provisiotu of the Zoning Code <br />In Instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unltfue to the <br />Individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when It Is demonstrated that such <br />actions will be In keeping with the spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. <br />The applicant has noted a number of hardships in his application. Staff would note that the clearly <br />demonstrable hardship is the existence of wetlands on the property with no additional dry buildable land <br />available to be acquired. The lot area after the vacation will be ^proximately 1.87 acres or nearly 95% <br />of the standard, based on information available to date. <br />Also in support of the request is the fact that the lot has had a substantial residence for many decades; the <br />property is sewered; and a new home can be placed on the property without the need for further variances. <br />The lot width variance should be considered as a technicality, in staffs opinion, and a variance should be <br />granted since no additional land is available, and all setbacks can be met without the need for a setback <br />variance. <br />Staff does not find any hardship that would support a wetland setback variance to continue the driveway <br />in its nonconforming location. Staff would recommend its relocation to avoid the variance. <br />Issues for Discussion <br />I. Is there any additional land available that would allow applicant to avoid tte need for lot area and <br />width variances? <br />2. Arcthereanyreasonsthatthedrivewaycannotbemovedto avoid a wetland setback variance? <br />3. Should a wetland delineation be required prior to issuance ofbuilding permits? Or, prior to the <br />footing inspection? <br />4. Are there any other issues of concern? <br /><1 I <br />A
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.