01-16-2007 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

� � FILE#07-3260 10 January 2007 Page 3 of 3 � Hardship Analysis lir cottsirleri�rg applications for vari�rnce, i/1e Planiting Contntission s/tall consider the effecf of tlee proposed variance rrpon i/ee Iteali/i,safet��antl welfare of tlre conmutulty, existing antl anticipated traffic conditio�rs, /iglrt aitd air, �la�:ger of frre, risk to t/ee pub/ic safety, ru:rl tlee effect nn vnlues of property in t/1e surrountling arer�. T/re Pltr�uring Contmissiar s/�a/l consirler reco�rrmending upproval for varia�:ces from f/te literal provisions of i/ie.Zoning Cotle iir iitstances wltere their strlcf enforcenteirt worrlrl cause u�:rlire Itar�lsliip becarrse of circrrmsiru:ces ruiiqcre to tlte iiirlivirlurrl properry trnrler coirs�tleratloii, arirl shall recomn:enrl approval o�rly when it is de�nonstratetl t/tai suc% actio�ts will be in keeping wit/t the spirit and intent of 1he Orono Zoning Cotle. Staff finds that the applicant's request may be reasonable in that there is not a definite demarcation of the side vs. the rear lot line on the property's southern portion, and that . the fence maintains a consistent height over the entire property rather than having a � variety of heights. Issaes for Consideration 1. Does the Plaiuung Commission find that the applicant's request is reasonable and • meets the intent of the fence regulations? ' 2. Does the Planning Conzmission fmd that there is a unique hardship specific to the property to justify the fence height variance? 3. If the Plazu�ing Commission finds that the applicant's request is reasonable is it more appropriate to consider a Zoning Code Amendment rather than a variance? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? . Staff Recommendation The Planning Commission should consider whether the hardship statement presented by the applicant supports the granting of the variance. If the Commission fmds that there is . a hardship or reasonable justification to grant the variance then a recommendation to approve would be appropriate... If fihe Comnussion determines that the fence as constructed is not reasonable, and is inappropriate in the location and height then a denial recommendation would be in order.... � If the Planning Commission feels the fence is appropriate but not justified tuider the vaxiance standards perhaps a code revision is an option to consider. If so this application should be denied and sent to Council to determine whether a code change should be pt�rsued.