Laserfiche WebLink
t <br /> . FILE#13-3605 <br /> 15 May 2013 <br /> Page 3 of 4 <br /> Stormwater Total Area in Allowed Existing Proposed <br /> Overlay District Zone Hardcover Hardcover Hardcover <br /> Tier <br /> Tier 3 25,021 s.f. g��57 s.f. 3,816 s.f. 9,284 s.f. <br /> (35%) (15.25%) (17.12%) <br /> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ <br /> Rear Yard Setback Variance <br /> The applicants' property has only 125 feet in depth making the 50-foot front and rear yard <br /> setbacks difficult to meet. The existing home meets the required 50-foot front setback and was <br /> granted a variance for the location 30 feet from the rear. The applicants request a rear setback <br /> variance to allow for the construction of a 14' x 14' deck with stair not to encroach closer to the <br /> lot line than the existing home or 30 feet. <br /> Practical Difficulties Statement <br /> Applicant has completed the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, <br /> and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. <br /> Practical Difficulties Analysis <br /> In considering applications for variance, the P/anning Commission shall consider the effect of <br /> the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and <br /> anticipated tra�c conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the <br /> effect on va/ues of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider <br /> recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in <br /> instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical di�culties because of <br /> circumstances unigue to the individua/ property under consideration, and shall recommend � <br /> approva/on/y when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and <br /> intent of the Orono Zoning Code. <br /> Staff finds the applicants' request for a setback variance is reasonable considering the nature of <br /> the small-lot neighborhood and the location of the existing home. There are trees between the <br /> applicants' property and the property to the rear which offer some screening. The deck is not <br /> proposed to encroach closer to the rear lot line than the existing home; does not appear that it <br /> will limit the light, air and open space between properties; and does not alter the character of <br /> the immediate neighborhood. <br /> , Upon inspection the Planning Commission will note there is an 83 square foot shed located <br /> between the home and the front lot line. The shed is 19.6 feet from the front lot line. This <br /> shed was constructed by a previous property owner and not the applicants. No permits <br /> exist for this shed and it exists in an illegal location. The Planning Commission should . , <br /> discuss whether or not it would be appropriate to require the applicants re-locate the shed <br /> to a conforming location (i.e. behind the front portion of the home and consistent with <br /> other setback requirements) as part of this variance request? <br /> Issues for Consideration <br /> 1. Should the 83 square foot shed be relocated to a conforming location? <br /> 2. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the <br />