HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-06-11 Memo, Notes for Public HearingTo: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley
Orono Planning Commission Members
City Administrator Bernhdrdson
From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator
Date: June 11, 1990
Subject: #1545 Dain & Janet Rodwell, 258 Cygnet Place
Variance - Public Hearing
Zoning District - RR-lB, single family rural residential, 2 acre,
unsewered
Application - Request for side setback variance to construct 3-
season porch
List of Exhibits
Exhibit
A
- Application
Exhibit
B
- Plat Map
Exhibit
C
- Property Owners List
Exhibit
D
- Survey
Exhibit
E
- Construction Plans
Exhibit
F
- Air Photo
Pertinent Facts -
1. Applicants propose to construct a 3-season porch to replace
their existing open deck. Because this lot is triangular in
shape, the south lot line is technically a side lot line
for setback purposes. The required side setback would be
30' where the deck is proposed to be 21.2' from the line.
2. The ne.` hboring adjacent residence is approximately 130'
from tree proposed screened porch. The adjacent yard
functions as the neighbors rear yard.
3. Lot area is about 28 -1,60 square feet or two-thirds of an
acre. Lot coverage including the proposed screened porch
will be 7%. The screened porch will not conflict with
existing or potential septic systems.
Discussion
This lot was platted in 1959 at a time when the minimum lot
size for this area was 25,000 square feet. The existing house
was constructed in 1971 under the R-lC zone, which required a
minimum of 1 acre. The required side setback at that time was
Zoning File #1545
June 11, 1990
qe 2
101. In 1975 the area was rezoned to RR-1B, 2 acre minimum, with
a 30' required side setback.
The proposed addition, while encroaching into the required
set -back, will maintain a significant distance from the
neighboring residence, and will be above the existing deck area.
At the proposed single story height, the screened porch should
not significantly affect open space in the neighborhood.
Staff has received no comments from any neighboring property
owners.
Based on the sketched -in building envelope on the survey,
there is very little area to the rear of the house where a
screened porch could be constructed without requiring a variance.
Staff Reco■s+endation
If Planning Commission finds that the 8.8' side setback
variance will not have a detrimental impact on the neighborhood,
a recommendation for approval would be appropriate.
lsv
I
(17) J
PARK
22) ;
�o
•fie.. I I h
S
(23)
+
C c 5 �� e ,
t s.
145 S�.f ie .��. 4.•
(20)
it
19
IS
.9- (21)
(26)
.,.ram •E IN
.......... ............................
=• • E a e
o `
11 _
ei 1P 'Sit St
CYGNET L
$ + .{fo• •rr N69'tl'2Sf
63
^a
ems• �
�1•E (50)ce
t
OPIO
b 1 • e� �_€
�
��1 A a.
310 4.1902 ®®�i ]
u 2 \ COO" (3) (8) 2e � (23) 16
(��710 200 -------63 a.s•Is
NOW
3.p
N74 NEST
S 1,Igo 29 ry ` 113
100
26r• _�-