Laserfiche WebLink
^040019 <br />June 21, 2004 <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage <br />18,796 s.f. (0.43 acres)Allowed: 2,819 s.f. (15%) <br />Proposed: 2,702 s.f. (14%) <br />Hardcover <br />Zone <br />Total Area in <br />Zone <br />Allowed <br />Hardcover <br />Existing <br />Hardcover <br />Proposed <br />Hardcover <br />500- 1000 18,796 s.f.6,578.6 s.f 1 <br />(35%) <br />Information not <br />provided <br />5,370 s.f <br />(28.57%) <br />After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds <br />Lot arca/width variances <br />This property sits within a small lot neighborhood in a 2.0 acre zoning district. Many of <br />the lots on this street as well as Tonka Avenue have substandard lot areas. Because this <br />property is less than a '/t acre, where 2.0 acres in normally required and has a defined <br />weith of 150’ when 200’ is required, variances to area and width must be approved in <br />order for the applicant to construct a new rc-iidcncc. <br />Front and Side Yard Setback Variances <br />Because of the nature of the small lot neighborhood the applicant has proposed Vi acre <br />setback standards when the 2.0 acre setbacks are required. The applicant has proposed a <br />30.5’ front yard setback when 50’ is normally allowed under to 2.0 r.cre standards. The <br />applicant has also proposed a 49.4’ north side yard setback and a 19.3’ south side yard <br />setback when 30’ is required under to 2.0 acre standards. This requires approval of front <br />and side (nortli and south) yard setback variances. <br />Hardship Statement <br />Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhib't B, and should be asked for <br />additional testimony regarding the application. <br />Hardship Analysis <br />fn considering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the <br />proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated <br />traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on valm s of <br />property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval <br />for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances 'here their strict <br />enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the IttJividual <br />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 />Staff finds that a hardship exists with relatio»'ship to the lot area and lot width variance <br />requests. The lot was established prior to adoption of the Zoning Ordinance and is <br />therefore a legal lot of record.