My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-20-2011 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2011
>
06-20-2011 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/15/2012 3:57:42 PM
Creation date
8/15/2012 3:57:35 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
157
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
FILE#11-3507 ' <br /> 16 June 2011 <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br /> LOT ANALY515 WORSHEET <br /> � Lot Area/Width: <br /> RR-16 • Lot Area Lot Width <br /> Required 87,120 s.f. (2 acres) 200' <br /> Actual 25,166 s.f. (0.58 acre) 115' <br /> � <br /> Setbacks• <br /> RR-16 Required Existing Proposed <br /> Front 50' 125' 97' <br /> Rear 50' 47.5' S3' <br /> North Side 30' 28.9' No Change <br /> South Side 30' 27.8' 25.1' <br /> Structural Covera�e: <br /> � Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage <br /> 25,166 s.f. (0.58 acre) Allowed: 3,775 s.f. (15%) <br /> . Proposed: 2,183 s.f. (8%) <br /> Side Yard Setback Variance <br /> 4 <br /> The applicants' property is nonconforming with respect to area and width. With the exception <br /> of the front yard, the existing home on the property does not meet the required setbacks. The <br /> . applicants are proposing to remodel and construct additions on the existing home. The • . <br /> applicants are also proposing to remove a portion of the home which encroaches into the rear <br /> yard as part of this request. The existing side yard setback on the south side is 27.8 feet. The <br /> applicants are requesting an additional new encroachment of 2.7 feet for a setback of 25.1 feet <br /> where 30 feet is required for a length of 52 feet. The addition does not appear to limit the light, <br /> air and open space enjoyed by the adjacent property owner. <br /> Updated Variance Analysis , <br /> As the planning commission is aware, there have been multiple changes to law regarding how a <br /> municipality must review an application for a variance. The "undue hardship" analysis has been <br /> replaced with the "practical difficulties" analysis. On your agenda this month is a proposed <br /> . zoning code text amendment intended to update the ordinance to ensure that it conforms to <br /> the statutory analysis of practical difficulties. While the current code directs staff, planning <br /> commission and the council to perform a "hardship" analysis; this application will actually be <br /> viewed consistent with the new practical difficulties analysis. , <br /> Staff Analysis <br /> The applicants' request for a side setback�ariance may be reasonable considering the size of the <br /> property. The applicants' request results in minimal negative impact of adjacent properties. <br /> Staff finds the location of the existing home and the size of the property creates a .unique <br /> circumstance not created by the applicants and that granting the applicants' request is in <br /> harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance and will not alter the essential character <br /> of the neighborhood. � <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.