Laserfiche WebLink
FILE#05-3157 <br /> 11 October 2005 <br /> - Page 3 of 3 <br /> over the existing home stepped back 2' from the front of the home resulting in a 46' <br /> setback for the 2°� story where a 44' setback currently eaists far the 1St story. <br /> Hardship St�tement <br /> Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and <br /> should be askecl for additioiial testimony regarding tile application. <br /> Hardship Analysis <br /> lir coirsidering npplicafions for variairce, 1/re Plan�ring Co��rnrission s/rr�l! consider 1/ie effect of t/1e <br /> proposet!i�uriance upo�l I/le Ireultll,sufety afrd welfare of�lre co�rrnuuliry, existi�rg�u«!rutticiprrter!tr�rf'fic <br /> couditions, !i�/it a�t�l air, �lmrger of fire, risk to t/ee pr�blic safety, nnd tlre effect o�r values of property ii: <br /> 1ke s��rrotording«rea. Tlre Plu�v:i�rg Com►nissiar slra//co�rsider reconrt�rending upproi�a! for variairces <br /> frorii t/�e/itera/provisions of t/1e Zoiriirg Corle in i�rsta�lces wJlere t/eeir strict enforcemeitt would cause <br /> �urdue /iards/iip becrrrrse of circumst�rnces aurique to t/re inrlii�idiia!property under consider�dioir, r�nrl <br /> s/udl reco»�mend approva/ only w/ten it is de�r:o�tstruted 1/rat sr�c/r actio�rs wi!/ be in keepifrg with 1/ie <br /> spirit and intent of t/re Orono Zotriitg Code. <br /> Staff finds that the orientation of the existing home with respect to the front lot line may <br /> serve as a hardship and it may be true that the existing setbacks are not inconsistent with <br /> the neighborhood; however the additions could be redesigned to meet the required 50' <br /> setback. The open pergola although not an enclosed addition is structure and does add to <br /> the bulk and massing. Staff finds that the additions could be redesigned to step back to <br /> the required 50' setback and that fliere is no hardship for the encroaclunent of the pergola. <br /> Issues for Consideration <br /> 1. Could the additions be stepped back up to 6.1' to meet tl�e 50' setback without <br /> coinpromising functionality of the home and additions? Is there value in this <br /> considering portions of the hoine already encroach up to 5.6'? <br /> 2. Does consistency with other setbacks in the neighborhood constiti.rte a hardship or <br /> sufficient justification for the variance? <br /> 3. Are there any other issues or concerns with tliis application? <br /> Staff Recommendation <br /> Plaruiing Staff reconunends denial of the front yard setback variances, and that the <br /> additions should be redesigned to meet the 50' front yard setback. <br /> 3 <br />