Laserfiche WebLink
FILE#06-3176 <br /> - 3 February 2006 <br /> Page 3 of 4 <br /> _ allowed limit for the 75' — 250' setback zone at 16.4%. The applicants are proposing to <br /> construci a home with a 2,361 s.f, footprint. <br /> The applicants' have proposed, a home with a 2,361 s.f footprint inclttding a garage, 705 <br /> s,f, of driveway (within this zone), a 204 s.f. patio, 160 s.f of sidewalk, and 147 s.f. of <br /> retaining wall and window well make up the 31.8% proposed hardcover. The clriveway <br /> and sidewalks as proposed are minimal. <br /> This application was compared to other lakeshore `total rebuilds' occurring during the six <br /> year period 1999-2004, using the charts (Exhibit G) created by siafF to illustrate the <br /> recent relationship between lot area, square footage of the 75-250' zone, approved house <br /> footprint, and 75-250' hardcover percentage. The intent of these charts is io assist in <br /> analyzing what level of hardcover would be consistent with past rebuilds on lots with <br /> similar characteristics. <br /> The charts are sorted by three categories: 1) Total Lot Area; 2) 75-250' Zone Area; atld <br /> 3) Approved Structure Footprint. Applicant's proposal is based on: <br /> Total Lot Area= 16,615 s.f. <br /> 75-250' Zone Area= 11,219 s.f. <br /> Structure Footprint Area=2,455 s.f. <br /> In comparison, it appears that: <br /> � Four lots with a similar total lot area (14,300 s.f. - 19,100 s.f.) have been <br /> approved with 75-250' hardcover ranging from 25% to 33%.,. <br /> • thirteen lots with a similar 75-250' zone area (10,000 s.£ - 15,000 s.£) have been <br /> approved for 75-250' hardcover ranging from 23.3% to 38.6%; however, only <br /> three of these exceeded 30%...and 7 of 13 met the 25% limit... <br /> � Fourteen lots with a similar structural footprint (2,000 s.£ - 3,000 s.f.) have been <br /> approved for 75-250' hardcover ranging from 23.3% to 33%; eight of fourteen <br /> met the 25% limit, and only two exceeded 30%... <br /> Hardship St�tement <br /> Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and <br /> should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. <br /> Hardship Analysis <br /> In co�tsideri�rg app/icntin�rs for i�nriar►ce, tlie P/nirni�rg Co��anissio�r shal! coiisirler t/re effect oj t/re <br /> proposed vrrriaf�ce upo�t U1e hea/th,snfety nnd welfare of tlre conr��nurilJ�, exisli�rg a�rd n�rticipnred lraffrc <br /> co�rditions, light rrnd air, rinnger of frre, risk lo t/re ptrb/ic safety, rurd tlre effect ar val��es of property iir <br /> the surrncuidirrg aren. TJte Plnirni»g Conrmission s/eaR consider reconu�rendi�rg npprovnl for vnricrnces <br /> .fronr tlre lrlern/provisions of ihe Zoning Code i�r insln�rces w/rere fheir strict enfnrcefr�ent would cnrrse <br /> �urrl�re Irard.s/rip becnuse of circunrstrrnces uiriq�re to Nre inrliviclunl property irnder considerniion, nnd <br /> s/tn// recotnntend approva! oitly w/ren it is denionstrnted llrnt suc/r actiats wi// be i�r keeping willr lhe <br /> sriril and inte�rt��f tlre Orono Zo�ring Code. <br /> Siaff f nds the lot area and width are iiillerent to the property, and no additional land is <br /> �vailable to increase the lot size. It would not be unreason�Ule to grant some level of <br /> hardcover variance to SLIp�OPt the proposed house which meets the lot cover�ge <br /> 3 <br />