Laserfiche WebLink
#04.2ffS <br />March It, 2004 <br />Pafi4 <br />Hardship Aaalytis <br />/if maUtrii^ tppttcttlwa/or ¥»rianet, Hu /Vaan/Nf CommissJoa shM ccmsUerthe effect of the pelted wWaacr <br />upem the ttemith, tefety end welfmre of the community, exhting end entictpeted truffle condUione, light end uir, <br />demger of fire, rtih to the public lefety, eud the effect eu values of property tu the surrounding urea. The Flannlng <br />CotuuUsslou ihaf/ eonsUer recommending t^provel for vexlencee from the llteml previsions of the Zoning Code <br />in Uutoncos mkere their stria enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unlgue to the <br />InMdtml property under consldemtlon, and shall recommend approval only when It Is demonstrated that such <br />actions will be In beeping with Ota s^tk and intent of the Oromo Zoalng 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 approximately 1.87 acres or nearly 9S% <br />of the standard, based on information available to date. <br />Also in support of the request isthe fact thatthe lot hashada substantial residence for many decades; the <br />propa^ is sewered; and anew home can be placed on the property without the need for Amber 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 />Staffdoes not find any hardship that would support a wetland setback variance to continue the dri vew ay <br />in its nonconforming location. Staff would recommend its lelocaiion to avoid the variance. <br />Issues for Discusskm <br />1.Is there any additional land available that would allow applicant to avoid the need for lot area and <br />width variances? <br />2. Are there any reasons that the dri vew ay cannot be moved to avoid a wetland setback variance? <br />3. Should a wetland delineation be required prior to issuance ofbuildingpennits? Or.priortothe <br />footing inspection? <br />4. Are there any other issues of concern?