Laserfiche WebLink
� , FILE�15-3T69 <br /> Odober 16,2fl15 <br /> Pape 5 oF 8 <br /> PracticaJ Difficulties 9tatement <br /> Applicants have completed the Prattical Difflculties Documentation Form attachetf as Exhibit B, <br /> and should be asked fnr additional testimony regarding the application. <br /> Analysis(Practical DNficulties) <br /> Staff would offer the following with regard to the 12 practicai difficulties oonsiderations: <br /> 1. The property owner is proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner very <br /> similar to how it is currentiy and has historically been used. <br /> 2. The plight of the property owner is due to having a smaal lot in a developed <br /> neighborhood of simtlariy small lots,and wh�ch is physically wnstrained as to expansion <br /> due to required setbacks,conditions not created by the property owner. <br /> 3. Constructian as proposed will not appreciably alter the character of the neighborhood, <br /> as the new garage repiaces a garage in approximately the same location that existed <br /> untfl 2011. <br /> 4. Economic considerations are nct a factor in this request. <br /> 5. Aocess to sunlight: NA. <br /> 6. Use varfance?:NA <br /> 7. Use as 2-family dwelling?NA <br /> 8. The candition of a sma{I, constra(ned laiceshore lot is common in Orono, but compared <br /> to many others, tMis lat due to its size and the 2-acre ioning standards functlonally has <br /> no buildable area as compared to ather lots which are wider, deeper and have more <br /> flexibility. <br /> 9. The pr�perty is unique in that very few lots in Orono of this size abut a creek that is <br /> considered as lakeshore, but this condition does affect other nearby lots along Eastlake <br /> Street which are subject to the same regulations. <br /> 10. The ability to have a garage would appear to be necessary for the preservation and <br /> enjoyment of any substantial property right. <br /> 11. Granting of the rrariances wauld not impair health, safety, oomfort or morals and <br /> appears to be generally in keeping w�th the intent of the Zoning Code. <br /> 12. Granting the variances in order to have a minimum sized garage is necessary to alleviate <br /> a demonstrated practical difficulty. <br /> Neighbor Commer�ts <br /> Comments about the application submitted by neigh6oring property owners are included in <br /> Exhibit 1. <br /> Issues for Conslderadon <br /> i. Does the Planning Commission find that that the praperty owner propases to use the <br /> property in a reasonabfe manner which is not permttted by an o�ciai control7 <br /> 2. Does the Planning Commissian find that the variances, if granted, will not alter the <br /> essential character of the neighbarhood7 <br /> 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditians in order to mittgate the <br /> impacts created by the granting of the requested variance{s)? <br /> 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application� <br />