My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-21-1997 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1997
>
07-21-1997 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/6/2023 9:12:03 AM
Creation date
9/6/2023 9:04:16 AM
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.
/
426
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
Zoning File #2259 <br />July 15, 1997 <br />Page 3 <br />Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality? The RR-IB <br />zone 30' side setback is intended to maintain the rural character of the 2 acre zone, <br />and to provide open space. Other homes in the neighborhood are separated by <br />distances ranging from 90-200'. Only applicants' residence and the residence to its <br />north are separated by a lesser distance, approximately 70', which would be reduced <br />to approximately 50' if the additions are constructed as proposed. <br />Do the conditions apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which <br />the property is located? All lots, including cul-de-sac lots, in the RR-IB zoning <br />district are required to meet the 30' side setback <br />Is the granting of the variance request necessary for the preservation and enjoyment <br />of a substantial property right of the applicants? The applicants have defined reasons <br />for the proposed additions. <br />Will the granting of the variance merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, or <br />is it necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty? The variance will be <br />a convenience for the applicants by allowing expansion of their residence as <br />proposed. The proposed room additions relate to the existing layout of the house: <br />additions which meet all setback requirements could be developed at the rear of the <br />house, but might not relate to the existing room layout. <br />"Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable <br />use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter." While applicant has <br />indicated that the costs of construction in the rear yard at a conforming location <br />would be higher due to building on fill, the layout of the house and room <br />relationships is also a factor in requesting the variance. <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1. <br />2. <br />3. <br />Under what circumstances is it appropriate to allow a 5' principal structure side setback in <br />the 2 acre zone? Does this application meet those circumstances? <br />Will the proposed additions change the character of the neighborhood? <br />How’ will the 5' setback impact access to the rear of the propert>', drainage, or existing <br />utilities?
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.