Laserfiche WebLink
m-3142 <br />October 17,2005 <br />Page 4 of5 <br />Hardcover Variance (0-75* & 7S ’-250* zones) <br />The property has two hardcover zones; the 0-75’ zone and 75’-250’ zone. 1,131 square <br />feet of hardcover currently exists in the 0-75’ zone where 0 s.f. is normally allowed. <br />Also, 2,298 s.f. (or 20%) hardcover exists in the 75’-250’ zone where 25% is normally <br />allowed. However, in order for the entire property to be within allotted hardcover <br />allowances the 0-75’ hardcover gets transferred back to the 75’-250’ zone (or 0-250’) <br />bringing the hardcover in the 73'-250’ zone to 3,429 s.f. or 30%, which was approved in <br />the June 2004 variances. The applicants have proposed to remove 147.5 s.f. of non- <br />structural hardeover in order to be permitted a shed. This would yield a net decrease in <br />hardcover of approximately 3.5 s.f. The removals consist of a smaller front sidewalk and <br />elimination of the driveway snip along the side of the garage. <br />Hardship Statemeat <br />Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit B, and should be asked for <br />additional testimony regarding the application. <br />Hardship Analysfa <br />/« coHskteriHg MppUc0thHt/br \mrtance, the Ptanalng Commission shall consider the effect of the <br />proposed variance npon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated <br />traffic conditions. Intend air, danger of fire, risk to the public sitfety, and the tyfect on valuesof <br />property In the surrounding area. The Hanning Commission shall consider recommending approval <br />for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code In Instances where their strict <br />enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the Individual <br />property under consUenuhn, and shall recommend approval only when U Is demonstrated that such <br />acrions wUI be In keying with the spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. <br />Staff finds that the property is unique due to the overlapping street and lake setback <br />requirements with the additional wetland restrictions. Those hardships are documented in <br />R^lution 5198 aj^roved in 2004. The proposal meets the intent of the code, being that <br />no increase in hardcover is proposed, the shed is not located closer to the street than the <br />existing house, the lake setback is met, as well as wetland and side yard setbacks. <br />However, a remaining issue is the City policy that non-structural hardcover should not be <br />traded for structural hardcover. This policy has been enforced in a manner consistent <br />with the intent and provisions of Resolution No. 4006 (attached as Exhibit F) and <br />depending on the reasonableness of the request and the various constraints of the <br />property, has on occasion been waived through the variance process. The Planning <br />Commission should determine whether a trade of non-structural hardcover should be <br />permitted for construction of the proposed shed. <br />WcUand Impacts <br />While this application was made prior to adoption of the current wetland ordinance and <br />would not be subject to the new wetland ordinance restrictions, the proposed location of <br />the shed meets the 50’ buffer and 20’ setback from the buffer from the delineated edge of <br />the “preserve” wetland. Installation of a buffer would not be required as the thresholds <br />noted in Section 78-1601 (cX4Ka-c) are not met. Technically, the applicant is only <br />required to meet a 26’ setback.