My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-16-2007 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2007
>
01-16-2007 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/19/2012 3:27:26 PM
Creation date
6/19/2012 3:26:59 PM
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.
/
428
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
. , . <br /> , FILE#07-3253 <br /> " S January 2007 <br /> Page 3 of 3 , <br /> I <br /> H�rdship Statement <br /> Applicant has completed the IIardship Doclimeniation Form attached as �xhibit B, and <br /> should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. ` <br /> � <br /> H�rdship An�►lysis <br /> In co�rsidering rrpplications for varirurce, llre Plmrning Conrnrissio�r slra!! cnnsider tlre effec! nf llle � <br /> prnposerl vnriance uporr t/re/realt/r,safety n�td�velfare of t/te cnnrnrrrnity, exisling nnd mlticiprderl traffrc � � <br /> coridilions, /ig/rt and nlr, rin�rger nf frre, rlsk ln l/re prrbllc snfety, rnld 11re effec!on vnh�es of property i�r � <br /> ' t/re surrorardi�rg nrea. T/le Pln�rniirg Conr��tissioir s/rdll cnnsider recnnrr�tending npprova! for varinnces � i <br /> front Nre literal provisions of llre Zo�ring Code in i�rslnfrces ivhere�Ireir sfrict enforcement would ca�rse ; <br /> rurd�re /tar�lslrip because of circumslairces curique la t/re i�rt/iv}rli�a!prnperly �urrler cansideratinrr, and <br /> slrnll reconrnre�rd «pprov�r! only wlre�r it is denraistratet! t/rat srrclr nctia�rs rvi!/be i�r keepi�rg wi1/r 1/re <br /> spirit a�rrl i�rtent of tlre Ororro Zoning Code. <br /> Staff finds that there is a hardship for a vaziance froin the side yard setback requirement i <br /> of 30'. Staff would make the argument that allowing for the minimum of a 3' wide � <br /> staircase and an addition to accommodate that at 4' as opposed to the 6' addition as <br /> proposed would be reasonable. This addition would result in a side setback of 23.6' as <br /> opposed to 21.6' as proposed. The resulting side setback would not be out of characfier- ' <br /> with the neighborhood. <br /> Tssues for Consideration <br /> Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? � <br /> . Staff Recommendation <br /> � Planning Staff recommends approval of a side setback variance to allow a 4' addition to <br /> the existing home, thus allowing for the minimum widtl� legal staircase. The applicant <br /> should submit a revised survey and building plan prior to City Council review. <br /> � <br /> � i <br /> 3 � <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.